Court : Patna
gurusharan sharma, j.1. defendants 1 and 2 of title suit no. 101 of 1975 have preferred this appeal against the impugned judgment and decree dated 30.6.1989, passed by the 3rd additional subordinate judge,arrah, where by the plaintiffs were directed to deposit a sum of rs. 62,000/-, being the remaining amount of consideration money, within a period of three months and the defendants were directed to withdraw the said amount and then execute the sale deed with respect to the suit properties in favour of the plaintiffs.2. one baldeo singh, son of kali singh, of village larauba, p.s. makdumpur, district gaya, on 27.5.1975 executed an agreement for sale in favour of janki singh and others of village bhikhampur, p.s. sahar, district- bhojpur with respect to 3.57 acres land of revisional survey khata nos. 56 and 66 situated at village bhikampur. the lands, including a house over r.s. plot no. 625 was agreed to be sold for rs. 80,000/-. a sum of rs. 14,000/- was paid in advance and janki singh and others were put in possession of the lands and the house in part performance of contract. the sale deed was to be executed by 1.8.1975, after obtaining necessary permission form the consolidation officer under the provisions of the bihar consolidation of holdings and prevention of fragmentation act, 1956.3. on 12.6.1975, baldeo singh filed applications for permission under section 5 of the said act which were registered as case nos. 192,193 195 and 196 of 1975. one paltan singh said to be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the state on point of ball.2. we have gone through the lcr and considered the submissions advanced by both the parties.3. this case relates to murder of a young l.a.s. officer posted at that time at gopalganj as district magistrate. all the appellants have been convicted under sections 302/149, ipc along with other sections and have been awarded death penalty. having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case us well as nature of the offences, we do not think it proper to release the appellants on bail.3a. accordingly, the prayer for ball is hereby rejected.4. i.a. nos. 1787 of 2007, 1821 of 2007 and 1844 of 2007 have been filed by all the three appellants for direction to the jail authorities not to keep them in cell or solitary confinement and also for a direction to give the appellants who are ex-member of parliament, ex-member of legislative assembly and ex-minister of the bihar respectively all the facilities to which they are entitled to.5. counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the state denying that the appellants were ever kept in solitary confinement or in cell either in beur jail or bhagalpur jail. they have been kept in high security ward along with other prisoners and they are being allowed to meet other prisoners in ward in day time. one of the appellants anand mohan is in medical college for proper observation and treatment as he is on hunger strike. it has been further stated that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. this appeal is directed against the part of the judgment dated 25.1.2000, passed by a learned single judge in c.w.j.c. no. 5468 of 1997, whereby he has set aside the direction given in the order of the lokayukta dated 12.12.1991 (annexure-7 to the writ application) regarding deduction of 1/3rd of the salary of ram ganesh rai (respondent no. 8 herein) and payment of the same to shyam sunderi devi, his step-mother (appellant herein).2. the facts necessary for the disposal of the present appeal are that rajendra rai was an employee of the state government and he died in harness in the year 1985 leaving behind his two widows, namely, shyam sunderi devi (appellant) and mukhiya devi. ram ganesh rai is the son from mukhiya devi, whereas, smt. bibha kumari is the daughter from shyam sunderi devi. respondent no. 8 ram ganesh rai was appointed on compassionate ground on 22.6.1990.3. the dispute arose between the two widows as to the payment of retiral dues and according to the agreement between the parties the entire retiral dues were to be paid to shyam sunderi devi and respondent no. 8 ram ganesh rai was to be appointed on compassionate ground. the said agreement was not acted upon by the parties and appellant shyam sunderi devi filed a petition before the lokayukta making a grievance about the same and also prayed for cancellation of appointment of ram ganesh rai on compassionate ground.4. taking into consideration the matter, the lokayukta by order dated 12.12.1991 directed as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
anil kumar sinha, j.1. both these applications were heard together as both the cases arise out of the common facts and common relief, inasmuch as, in both the cases, it has been prayed that the entire criminal proceedings including the order of cognizance taken in complaint case no. 141/99 (t.r. no. 839/99) pending in the court of sri k.k. singh, judicial magistrate, jamshedpur, may be quashed.2. in both the cases, the facts are almost similar. the petitioners' case, in short, is that the complainant (opposite party no. 2) filed a complaint-petition in the court of the chief judicial magistrate, jamshedpur, on 8.3.1999 against the petitioners which was transferred to the file of sri k.k. singh, judicial magistrate, jamshedpur, under section 192(2) cr.p.c. for disposal and the learned magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant as well as the statement of sole witnesses, namely, b.r. chakraborty and took cognizance in the case under sections 408, 418 and 120b of the indian penal code and passed order for issuing summons against the accused-petitioners. later on, warrant of arrest and processes under section 82, cr.p.c. were also issued. the brief facts, in the complaint-petition are that the complainant who was one of the directors of m/s. bihar air products ltd. in short ('b.a.p.l.') which is a company engaged in manufacturing and supplying industrial gases alleged that the petitioner narayan chandra mukherjee was appointed as company secretary-cum-general manager .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
sudhir kumar katriar and kishore k. mandal, jj.1. the state of bihar has preferred this appeal in terms of clause 10 of the letters patent of the patna high court, and is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 25.8.1999, passed in c.w.j.c. no. 11619 of 1998 (dinesh prasad v. the state of bihar and ors.), whereby the writ petition was allowed and the separate orders passed under rules 43(b) and 139(a)(b) of the bihar pension rules 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the '1950 rules'), imposing punishment of deprivation of pension to the extent of 50% for a period of five years, have been set aside. we shall go by the description of the parties occurring in the writ petition.2. a brief statement of facts is essential for the disposal of this appeal. the writ petitioner (the respondent herein) was posted as an executive engineer in the bagmati nagar project, sitamarhi, which was then under the irrigation department, and has since 1988 been converted into the department of water resources. the petitioner was so posted from 7.1.1978 to 3.7.1981. the state government received adverse reports with respect to the working of different irrigation projects and/or anti-flood measures during the period 1980-87. a vigilance enquiry was conducted which had submitted it report on 2.1.1987. this was followed by an enquiry by the finance (audit) team, and the report was submitted on 15.11.1990. the reports prima facie showed complicity of the petitioner and 32 other functionaries, who had .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. according to anil kumar singh, son of late janardan sinha, his grand-father ram binod singh died testate on 23rd may, 1967. in 1983 almost 16 years after the death of the testator, anil kumar singh filed an application for grant of letters of administration annexed with the will. at the time when the application was filed one of the sons of ram binod singh, namely, dr. surendra sinha was alive. he was accordingly cited but, admittedly, he did not enter a caveat. one of the daughters of ram binod singh, namely, sharda mandal, on being cited, filed a caveat and thereupon filed an affidavit-in-support of the caveat and, as a result, in 1987 the application for grant was treated as a suit in between anil kumar singh, plaintiff and sharda mandal, defendant. 2. in the meantime on 30th october, 1986. dr. surendra sinha died intestate and, as a result, his wife brij shanti mani, being the appellant above named, in her own capacity, acquired some interest in the estate of ram binod singh, testator. in 1995 appellant filed a caveat. prior thereto the defendant in the suit prayed for a direction for issuance of a citation upon the appellant. that having been rejected, the matter came up before this court, when this court observed that the thing, as was being sought for by the defendant in the suit, is unheard of. according to the appellant, subsequent thereto over telephone, the defendant in the suit informed the appellant about the pendency of the suit and accordingly the appellant .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
b.n. agrawal, j.1. this writ application has been filed for quashing orders dated 12.1.1996, issued by the deputy commissioner of commercial taxes, hazaribagh, contained in annexures 4, 5 and 6, whereby purporting to act under section 7a of the bihar electricity duty act, 1948 (hereinafter to be refereed to as 'the act') bank accounts of the petitioner-company in three banks viz. united commercial bank, ranchi, state bank of india, ranchi and bank of india, ranchi have been attached for payment of the amount of surcharge under section 3a of the act. further prayer has been made for a declaration that the petitioners are not liable to pay amount of surcharge under section 3a of the act.2. short facts are that petitioner no. 1is a company incorporated under the provisions of the indian companies act having its registered office in the district of hazaribagh and petitioner no. 2 is its deputy manger (accounts). the petitioner-company is manufacturer of alloys, tool and special steel and it purchases electricity from damodar valley corporation (hereinafter to be referred to as 'dvc), which is a licensee within the meaning of section 2(d) of the act for the purpose of its industry under an agreement executed between dvc being licensee and the petitioner-company as consumer. according to clauses 17 of the agreement, the petitioner-company, which was a consumer, was liable to pay electricity duty (hereinafter to be referred to as 'duty') to the government of bihar on the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. state of bihar and its officers aggrieved by the order dated 18th june, 2007, passed by the patna bench of the central administrative tribunal in o.a. no. 712 of 2004, have preferred this application and pray for quashing of the aforesaid order.2. short facts giving rise to the present application are that respondent no. 1 brij bihari prasad was initially recruited as sub-inspector of police on 2.1.1966. he was promoted as inspector on officiating basis by order dated 16.7.1971 and he joined as such on 27.7.1971. however, he was promoted as regular inspector with effect from 2.7.1978 and confirmed as such with effect from 1.4.1982. earlier his seniority in the rank of inspector was to be reckoned with effect from 27.7.1971, that is, the day on which he had joined as officiating inspector but later on by order dated 13.4.1993, it was modified and his seniority as inspector was directed to be reckoned with effect from 2.7.1978, that is, the date on which he was promoted on regular basis. respondent no. 1 brij bihari prasad challenged the aforesaid order by filing cwjc. no. 4108 of 1991 before this court, which quashed the aforesaid order and directed that his seniority be reckoned from the date he joined as officiating inspector, that is, 27.7.1971. respondent no. 1 thereafter was granted regular promotion as inspector with effect from 1.1.1975 and promotion as deputy superintendent of police with effect from 11.7.1981. respondent no. 1 challenged his promotion as deputy .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
lok nath prasad, j.1. this revision is directed against the judgment dated 10.8.1989 passed by the 7th additional sessions judge, dhanbad in criminal appeal no. 61 of 1993 through which the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under sections 4 and 5 of the explosive substances act was maintained and confirmed.2. the fact in short giving rise to this revision is that on 22.10.1978 at about 3 a.m. in the night the informant along with other police officials s.i. tarni prasad yadav asi md. mustafa were on patrolling duty and they were going towards gohinbandh and had reached near gohinbandh railway crossing they saw one person moving in suspicious circumstances with a bag in hand and seeing the police party he wanted to escape away. it has been alleged that after chase, that man was apprehended and from his possession about 500 grams of gandhak like materials, 40 grams of potas like materials and two bundles of subtle, were found which were concealed in a bag and the informant suspected these articles to be explosive substance and as such seized and prepared the seizure list in present of the witnesses. subsequently the seized articles were sent to the deputy controller of explosive who was an expert of explosive materials and he examined the same and submitted a report and it was found that she seized articles bear explosive substances and on receipt of the report and after completing the investigation and obtaining sanction for prosecution, of accused, charge-sheet was .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
p.k. sinha, j.1. this first appeal arises out of the judgment and decree recorded by the 5th additional subordinate judge at motihari in title suit no. 206/1966/ 21/1971. the suit having been dismissed by the trial court the plaintiff has come as appellant and the defendants including substituted heirs are respondents who, for the sake of convenience, will be referred to as the plaintiff and the defendants.2. mostt. rampati kuer filed the suit aforesaid for declaration of her title over the suit property detailed in schedule i to iii of the plaint as well for recovery of possession over the same and for mesne profit. the case of the plaintiff in brief was that her father-in-law ram sunder sah had a son rajaram sah and four daughters, the plaintiff being the wife of the aforesaid rajaram sah who predeceased his father. thereafter, ramsunder sah also expired leaving behind his widow, the plaintiff and four daughters. in the year 1951 widow of ram sunder sah also died whereafter the plaintiff came into possession over the entire suit properties left by ramsunder sah. further the case of the plaintiff was that original defendant no. 1, sotim sah, as also defendant nos. 2 and 3 confided in the plaintiff that the daughters of ramsunder sah had greedy eyes upon the suit properties, and, thereby induced the plaintiff to execute a mokhtarnama (power of attorney) in their favour so that they could manage the anticipated litigations. believing them the plaintiff agreed to their .....
Tag this Judgment!