Court : Patna
..... from 1. air 1952 sc 181 (dattatraya moreshwar v. the state of bombay & ors), 2. air 1952 sc 317 (state of bombay v. purushottam jog, 3. air 1955 sc 160 (p. joseph john v. state of travancore-cochin, and 4. air 1964 sc 1823 (chitralekha v. state of mysore).14. the respondents have tried to take advantage ..... was granted recognition, has been cancelled on the ground that the recognition was granted contrary to bar created by section 16 of the national council for teacher education act, 1993 (ncte act, 1993). as per the writ petitioner, the impugned order dated 09.04.2009 is misconceived and against the principles of natural justice because it was issued without ..... recognition for undertaking teachers training course for the period 1979-81 till 1994-96, which is prior to coming into force of the national council for teachers education act, 1993 which came into force with effect from 17.8.1995, i direct that genuine students of the aforesaid institution be permitted to submit their fees and forms .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
..... and 4 paragraph-1). the copy of the judgment is on the record which shows that they were convicted though granted benefit of section 4 of the provision of offenders' act. no doubt, they were convicted but their sentence was to the extent that they were released in terms of section 4 of the provision of offenders ..... ' act. in the flat denial of p.ws 1 and 2 that they were not at all convicted in any case goes to show that they were not true and genuine .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
..... case of respondent no.5 is that c. s. khesra no. 1860 and 1861 measuring 9 decimals was purchased by a registered sale deed, dated 28.3.1955. after the execution of the sale deed, respondent no. 5 has been living on the said plots of land which contains a house and the court yard. in ..... the case ofkrishna singh vs. deputy director consolidation, 2008 (4) pljr 63 has interpreted section 34(2) of the bihar consolidation of holdings and prevention of fragmentation act, 1956 and held that if there is proper authorization to the deputy collector to exercise the powers of revision by the director consolidation, after obtaining sanction of the ..... the consolidation officer, goraul for appropriate action. the respondents being aggrieved by the order of the dy. director filed an application under section 35 of the consolidation act before the director consolidation.6. the director consolidation has relied on the verification and spot inspection made in this case which would indicate that in fact 1 (one .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
..... by registered sale deeds dated 04.12.1978.18. so far the third point raised by learned counsel for the appellants is concerned, section 19 of the specific relief act, 1963 does not come in support of the defendants-appellants, as it provides that specific performance of contract may be enforced against either party to the contract or any ..... facts and circumstances none of the reliefs claimed by the plaintiff in his plaint even after amendment are not barred under the provisions of article 59 of the limitation act, 1963.17. so far the second point raised by learned counsel for the appellants is concerned, it is quite apparent that title suit no.10 of 1979 was ..... of title suit no.98 of 1981. hence learned counsel for the appellants claimed that subsequently added relief was barred by the provision of article 59 of the limitation act, 1963 and cannot be legally granted.11. the second point raised by learned counsel for the appellants is that earlier title suit no.10 of 1979 was filed for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. This second appeal has been filed by defendants- appellants-appellants challenging judgments and decree of both the courts below. 2. The matter arises out of Title Suit No.104 of 1977 which was filed by plaintiffs-respondents-respondents for declaration that they were the rightful owners of the suit land measuring 40 ft x 10 ft bearing Plot No.295 and that the defendants had no manner of right, title and interest therein and also for declaration that survey map and record of rights prepared by the revisional survey authorities published on 01.09.1977 by including the suit land in Plot no.298 appertaining to Khata no.147, of Thana no.288, Tauzi no.3260 under Colgong Police Station within the District of Bhagalpur, in the name of defendant no.1 was wrong and incorrect. The plaintiff further sought a decree of permanent injunction restraining defendant no.1 from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs. 3. The defendants appeared and contested the case of the plaintiff claimin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.2. The two petitioners have sought quashing of K.Hat Police Station Case No. 149 of 2005 including the order dated 30.01.2006 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Purnia taking cognizance for the offences under Section 409, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The relevant facts of this case is that the petitioners were posted respectively as In-charge, District Manager and In- charge, Assistant Accounts Officer of the State Food Corporation at Purnia against whom besides another a case was instituted on the report of Dr. D.P. Upadhaya, In-charge, District Manager with the assertion that co-accused Surendra Prasad, Deputy Manager, Dhamdaha and Bhawanipur, godowns of State Food Corporation got huge amount worth Rs. 59,59,348.53 defaulcated and the petitioners were also cooperated in such defaulcation by not properly inspecting the g...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
..... -5 which is rate chart. from perusal of the same, it appears that this is an order dated 4.3.1996. the notification u/s 4 of the land acquisition act has been issued on 1.9.1990. therefore, in my opinion, this rate fixed by the state government in the year 1996 is also not applicable. the appellant have not ..... holders, appellants filed application under section 18 of the land acquisition act claiming that the market value of the lands acquired was rs.15 lacs per katha. the case of the appellants was that the land and holding under acquisition situated in ..... 1999 and only a part of construction of smt. krishna rana, the appellant of first appeal no. 544 of 1999 were involved. notification under section 4 of the land acquisition act was published in the district gazette on 1.9.1990. the collector after hearing the parties, awarded compensation at the rate of rs.2,45,163 per katha. the land .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
..... suspicion but in the present case, there is quite and clear reasonable and probable cause for moving the criminal court. in the present case, it further appears that the appellants acted on the basis of the public application. the plaintiff himself has admitted that the said application disclosed a cognizable offence and therefore, it cannot be said that when the prosecutor ..... the suit barred u/s 80 c.p.c.?(iv) is the suit barred by the law of limitation?(v) is the suit barred under the provision of specific relief act? (vi) is the suit barred by the principle of estoppel, waiver and acquiescence?(vii) is the plaintiff entitled for the damages sustained on account of malicious prosecution?(viii) is the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
..... learned single judge set aside the revisional order and remanded the matter to the director of consolidation only on the ground of lack of jurisdiction in the deputy director to act as revisional authority, the order under appeal is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the writ court to hear the parties afresh and pass any appropriate judgment .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. This writ petition has been preferred by two petitioners to challenge order of Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna dated 19.12.2008 whereby O.A. No. 381/2008 preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed summarily after noticing the dismissal of three earlier O.As out of which O.A. No. 540/1994 was filed by the present petitioners and others raising similar grievance.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn our attention to the earlier order of the Tribunal dated 12.11.1997 passed in O.A. No. 540 of 1994(Annexure-2) to highlight that by the said order the Tribunal had not dismissed the claim of the petitioners and some others but had remanded the matter to the competent authority who was required to dispose of the representation in the light of observations made by the Tribunal in that order. It was further highlighted that the Tribunal had indicated two issues of facts and had required the concerned authorities to decide those issues relating to correctnes...
Tag this Judgment!