Court : Patna
1. The present writ application has been filed by two Associations of Truck Owners for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Transport Authority not to insist upon production of tax token for the purpose of grant on goods carriage permits under and in accordance with the provisions contained under Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Central Act' only). 2. The petitioners are registered Associations of Truck Owners. According to the statements made in the writ application, respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are not issuing permits to the truck owners unless tax tokensare produced as a proof of deposit of taxes levied under the provisions of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930 (hereinafter in short the 'State Act'). 3. The tax token is an evidence of payment of tax including the additional tax under the provisions of the State Act. According to the petitioners, the respondents are acting mala fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 20th July, 1991 passed by the District Forum, Jehanabad in Complaint Case No. 50 of 91 in which the appellant was the complainant (hereinafter called the complainant) and respondent was the opposite party (hereinafter called the opposite party). 2. The relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal may be briefly stated. The opposite party invited offers for settlement of shops of various dimensions through bid with the condition that Rs. 200/- was to be deposited for taking part in bid and that the minimum official Salami for the shop was. Rs. 60,000/-and the monthly rental for a shop having a carpet area of 20 x 20 was Rs. 1,000/- and that the shop will be let out to the highest bider provided he deposited the 10% of the bid amount immediately and deposited the remaining amount within 15 days (vide Annexure-I to the Memo of Appeal). The complainant deposit d Rs. 200/- for taking part in the bid held on 25.1.91 and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
G.C. Bharuka, J. 1. In this reference made under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (in short, 'the Act' hereinafter), relating to the assessment year 1975-76, the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the firm, Messrs. Agiwal and Company, in which the assessee was a partner was an industrial undertaking within the meaning of Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?' 2. The assessee is a partner in a firm, Messrs. Agiwal and Company. The said firm acts as a civil contractor engaged in construction of roads, buildings and drains. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act of the value of interest in the assets of the firm on the ground that the entire assets of the firm formed part of an industrialundertaking belonging to the firm. The value of the assessee's interest in the assets of the fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Aftab Alam, J. 1. This application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging an order dated November 7, 1981, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Patna, in Reference No. 18 of 1977. By the impugned order, the Labour Court refused to accept a settlement, said to have been arrived at between the union (respondent No. 2) and the management (the petitioner) and directed that he would proceed to adjudicate on the dispute under reference on its merits. It is to be noted at the outset that the reference relates to the removal from service of an individual workman, respondent No. 3. 2. The facts of this case are brief and not in dispute; it is another matter that those facts are being interpreted differently by the contending parties. 3. Respondent No.3 (hereinafter referred to as 'the concerned workman') was a workman of the petitioner-company. He was removed from employment by notice dated November 24, 1975, a copy of which has been enc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
S.B. Sinha and G.C. Bharuka, JJ.1. In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of an order as contained in Memo No. 3836 dated 30-6-1992 whereby and whereunder the appointment of the petitioner in the post of Graduate Physical Training Teacher in Anusuchit Janjati Awasiya Uchcha Vidyalaya, Nima, Katihar has been cancelled and also for quashing of the order whereby he has been directed to refund a sum of Rs. 12.127-60 paise.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.3. The petitioner filied an application before the Director Welfare, Government of Bihar for his appointment as a Graduate Physical training teacher in the school in question.4. The Minister Incharge, Tribal Welfare made an endorsement to the respondent No. 3 on 21-8-1991 for his appointment in the said school. The said application of the petitioner was thereafter forward by the Assistant Director, Welfare, vide his memo No. 7204, dated 1-10-1991 with a direction to take necessary steps for his a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1993)45ITD61(Pat.)
1. These two cross appeals were filed objecting certain decisions of the ld. CIT (Appeals) in his order dated 30-6-1992. The assessee objected to the disallowance of Rs. 22,742 paid as interest and the revenue objected to the deletion of addition made under Sections 69 & 69A(sic) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter naming of the Act is omitted).2. The assessee is an individual. He is a Director of M/s Bharat Engineering & Body Building (P.) Ltd. and one of the partners of M/s B.F. Industries. The assessee had paid interest on loans amounting to Rs. 22,742 during the year. The parties to whom the interest was paid were as follows:- 5. V. Dayal Khuntelal Rs. 8,676 ----------- The payment of these interest was claimed as deduction from income earned by the assessee. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim as according to him the claim does not satisfy the conditions of Section 57(iii). He had given various reasons which can shortly be described as follows:- He pointed out that th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
S.B. Sinha, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing an order dated 20th April 1992 in Land Ceiling Case No. 2 of 1973-74/3 of 1982-83 and as contained in Annexure-5 to the writ application whereby and whereunder the said proceeding was directed to be re-opened.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.One Sheetal Prasad Thakur was the land holder. The respondent No 4 is his son and the petitioner is the son of Respondent No. 4. In a proceeding initiated in terms of the provisions of Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 two units were allotted one in favour or the petitioner and another in favour of the respondent No, 4. Sheetal Thakur died in the year 1984 and by an order dated 6;9-1988 (Annexure-1) it has been held that the petitioner became a major on 26-3-1984 and thus he became entitled to one unit in view of the decision of this court in Smt. Ramdular...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
B.N. Agrawal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. Nobody has appeared to contest the appeal in spite of service of notices upon the respondents.2. This appeal has been filed against the order passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench, (hereinafter to as 'the Tribunal') in a claim application by which the appellant's claim has been rejected on the ground of limitation though on merit the Tribunal was of the view that it was a fit case for allowing the claim. According to the Tribunal, the suit was barred under Article 11 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as '1963 Act') which corresponds to Article 31 of the Limitation Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as '1908 Act'). In the present case, the claim case was filed on 18.5.1983 for awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,649.46 being price of goods in question on account of short deli very. The question is whether the limitation shall begin to run from 15.1.1980 on which day demand...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
B.N. Agrawal, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. No body has appeared to contest the appeal in spite of service of notices upon the respondents. 2. This appeal has been filed against the order passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in a claim application by which the appellant's claim has been rejected on the ground of limitation though on merit the Tribunal was of the view that it was a fit case for allowing the claim. According to the Tribunal, the suit was barred under Article 11 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as '1963 Act') which corresponds to Article 31 of the Limitation Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as '1908 Act'). In the present case, the claim case was filed on 18-5-1983 for awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 7649.46 p. being price of goods in question on account of short delivery. The question is whether the limitation shall begin to run from 15-1-80 on whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Both these writ applications involving common question of fact and law were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.3. In these writ applications the petitioners have questioned the orders passed by the District Magistrate, Patna (Respondent No. 4) whereby he directed the Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union (hereinafter to be referred as 'Biscomaun') not to make any payment for seeds/gram seeds supplied by the petitioner till further orders.4. The said orders are contained in Annexures-4 and 7 to the afore mentioned writ petitions respectively.5. In or about August, 1984, tender notices were issued for supply of seeds/gram seeds for the Rabi crops for the year 1984-85. On 10-9-1984 the petitioners submitted their tenders and rates for supply of seeds of different qualities were finalised thereafter upon negotiation.6 On or about 30-9-1984 the Deputy Managing Director o...
Tag this Judgment!