Court : Patna
Decided on : Jan-28-2014
mungeshwar sahoo, j. 1. the plaintiff has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 07.01.2011 passed by sri devanand mani tripathi, the learned 8th subordinate judge, saran at chapra in title suit no.184 of 1997 whereby the court below dismissed the plaintiffs suit. 2. the plaintiff-appellant filed the aforesaid suit for declaration of title over the suit property and further declaration that the defendants have no right and title over it. 3. the plaintiffs claimed the aforesaid relief alleging that one, md. kazim was the plaintiffs ancestor who died leaving behind md. haneef and imdad imam who inherited the property. they amicably partitioned the tauzi no.5655 and came in possession to the extent of half and half. imdad sold his entire half share to md. haneef as such, he became the absolute owner of the entire tauzi. md. haneef gave the milkiyat of tauzi to his wife, bibi sakina in hiba in the year 1925 who came in possession. the heirs of haneef died and sakina also died in 1953 leaving behind her only son, abdul hameed who inherited entire property of bibi sakina because other sons of bibi sakina had died. 4. further case of the plaintiff is that bibi sakina gifted 4 kathas 11 dhurs of land of plot no.11239 and 2 kathas 10 dhurs in holding no.232 to bibi fahmida bano by registered deed of gift dated 13.05.1949. fahmida bano came in possession of the gifted property. she sold entire 4 kathas 11 dhurs of plot no.11239 to mahmooda khatoon, the defendant no.1 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : May-06-2014
1. heard mr. j.s. arora, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant-appellants and mr. a.b. ojha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff-respondents. 2. this second appeal has been filed assailing the judgment and decree passed by the appellate court below affirming the decree in the suit in favour of the plaintiff-respondents. 3. the plaintiffs instituted the t.s. no. 56 of 1994 praying for the relief of declaration of their title over the suit land described in schedule-ka of the plaint and further for confirmation of their possession over the same and in alternative for recovery of possession if dispossessed during the pendency of the suit. later on, by amendment in the plaint, the plaintiffs added the fact of their dispossession from the suit land by the defendants during the pendency of the suit. the consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land has also been prayed. 4. the facts are not in dispute between the parties that the plaintiffs were the title holders of the land described in schedule-ka of the plaint and similarly the defendants were also title holders of the lands described in schedule-kha of the plaint. the total area of land in schedule-ka is 0.78 acres of village dehri, p.s. dinara, district-rohtas. the total area of land described in schedule-kha is also 0.78 acres out of which 10 decimal is situated in village-dehri, p.s. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Apr-02-2014
1. the plaintiff no. 2-appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 28.01.2005 passed by the learned 4th additional district judge, siwan, in title appeal no. 4 of 1996 by which the judgment and decree dated 8.12.1995 and 3.1.1996 respectively passed in title suit no. 47 of 1989 by the learned 2nd munsif, siwan, have been set aside, the appeal has been allowed and the title suit no. 47 of 1989 has been remanded to the court below for deciding it afresh after framing proper additional issues and taking evidence of the parties. 2. the plaintiff no.1-respondent no.2, dinesh ram, filed title suit no. 47 of 1989 for declaration that the deed of gift dated 1.11.1988 (ext.e) executed by his father, namely, haruni ram (defendant no. 2) in favour of defendant no. 1, namely, sahdeo ram (original respondent no. 1) for the suit land was forged, fabricated, without consideration and not legally executed giving any right to the donee, besides permanent injunction from dispossession or further alienation. 3. during the pendency of the suit, the appellant was added as plaintiff no. 2 and her case was that plaintiff no. 1 and the defendants were in collusion with each other and the suit had been brought to defeat her title which she had already acquired by sale deed followed by mutation etc. 4. the case of plaintiff no. 2 is that defendant no. 2 being the karta of his family entered into a contract in may, 1986 to sell his kastkari and dihbasgit land for rs.25,000/- and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : May-14-2014
the petitioner has filed this criminal writ application under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india seeking following reliefs:- (i) for quashing of the f.i.r., bearing alamganj p.s. case no. 315 of 2012, registered under section-135 of the electricity act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the act) on the ground of being not maintainable as the same has been instituted for the same offence for which alamganj p.s. case no. 19 of 2009 was instituted; (ii) for a declaration that the second f.i.r. is not maintainable after quashing of the previous f.i.r./order taking cognizance in the previous f.i.r. for the same offence; (iii) for a direction to the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner in pursuance of alamganj p.s. case no. 315 of 2012; (iv) for a declaration that the f.i.r. instituted in contravention to the statutory provisions cannot be maintained; (v) for any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be found deemed entitled to.? facts of the case briefly stated is that on receiving secret information by the officers of the bihar state electricity board that the petitioner was drawing electricity by illegal means, a raid party was constituted comprising of the electrical executive engineer, electrical inspector (vigilance), the junior electrical engineer and others. according to the f.i.r., when the raid party entered the residential house of the petitioner it was found that a low tension supply line was passing over the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : May-16-2014
1. this appeal has been preferred by the appellant rajiv singh against the judgment of conviction dated 21.10.2011 whereunder, he has been found guilty for an offence punishable under sections 304b, 201, 498a of the i.p.c. and sentence dated 25.10.2011 directing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under section 304b of the i.p.c., rigorous imprisonment for two years as well as also slapped with fine appertaining to rs. five thousand in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month additionally under section 201 of the i.p.c., rigorous imprisonment for two years as well as also fined rs. five thousand in default thereof, to undergo s.i. for one month additionally, under section 498a of the i.p.c. with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently. 2. after hearing both sides as well as going through the record, certain admitted fact is to be taken note of for better appreciation. appellant rajiv singh happens to be the husband of rani archana sinha (so alleged victim) with whom marriage was solemnized on 29.04.2007. it is also an admitted fact that the couple proceeded to enjoy holiday (might be a honeymoon trip) to darjeeling, manipal etc. and during course of returning, while the couple were travelling by the capital express, aforesaid rani archana sinha disappeared. rajiv singh arrived at patna and then returned back to mokama where he had conversation with his mother in-law and after getting proper instruction on the facts so disclosed by .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : May-13-2014
i.a. ansari, j 1. under challenge, in the present appeals, are the judgment of conviction, dated 28.07.2007, in sessions trial no. 91 of 1992, by the learned additional sessions judge, fast track court no. ii, khagaria, and the order, dated 30.07.2007, whereby various sentences have been passed against the accused-appellants. 2. by the impugned judgment, learned trial court has convicted all the accused-appellants, under sections 342, 323 and 307 read with 34 of the indian penal code and section 302 read with section 149 of the indian penal code. the learned trial court has also convicted the accused-appellants, namely, mahendra tanti and ram sharesh tanti, under sections 302 and 148 of the indian penal code. the learned trial court has further convicted the accused-appellants, namely, bhadai tanti, chandra deo tanti and bhujangi tanti, under section 149 of the indian penal code. the trial court has also convicted the accused-appellant, namely, mahendra tanti, under section 148 of the indian penal code. for their conviction under section 302 read with section 149 of the indian penal code, all the accused-appellants have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. for their conviction under section 342 read with section 34 of the indian penal code, all the accused-appellants have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. for their conviction under section 323 read with section 34 of the indian penal code, all the accused-appellants have been .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Mar-14-2014
1. heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. in all these writ applications, the petitioners, being the aspirants for selection and appointment on the post of pharmacist, have assailed the result of 468 candidates, who were declared to be successful by the bihar staff selection commission (hereinafter to be referred to as the commission) in its communiqu published on 9.5.2012. a consequential prayer has also been made for preparing fresh list of selected candidates after holding fresh interview and giving due weightage to academic qualification specially in the pharmacy examination in accordance with the past practice as well as the prevalent policy of the state government. 3. these six writ applications, which were also heard together with other batch of writ applications relating to the same selection and appointment on the post of pharmacist, are however being separately disposed of as in these cases, primarily the issue of anomalies in the process of selection has been raised. let it be noted that in the other batch of writ applications, the eligibility condition of age or the violation of the government policy of roaster and reservation were addressed and they have been also separately disposed of. 4. the petitioners of these six cases, as noted above, have questioned the process of selection. the facts giving rise to these writ applications being the same and similar, which have been noted by this court in cwjc no. 706 of 2012 (jawahar lal singh and anr. vs. the state .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Jan-29-2014
oral judgment: 1. sole appellant shiv kumar sahni who has been found guilty for an offence punishable under section 307 of the ipc and been directed to undergo r.i. for ten years as well as also fine rs.20,000/- in default thereof to undergo s.i. for six months additionally, under section 27 of the arms act to undergo r.i. for five years as well as slapped with fine appertaining to rs.10,000/- and in default thereof to undergo s.i. of three months additionally, with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently by 5th additional sessions judge, east champaran at motihari in sessions trial no.504 of 2012/268 of 2012 challenged the same under present appeal. 2. p.w.6 om prakash sahni filed written report on 26.12.2011 at about 4 p.m.(not exhibited) alleging inter-alia that there happens to be a piece of land standing in the name of his grand-father. he had gone there to see and found his co-villager jangbahadur sahani, shiv kumar sahani, rajesh sahani, nawal sahani, dhanai sahani, munna sahani, madan sahani, nandu sahani, saheb sahani, janki sahani, ganesh sahni who had engaged amin sahni and mangal sahani as for construction of house over the land. he forbade them over which jangbahadur sahani claimed the land and further directed him to leave otherwise, he will be murdered. he insisted, over which jangbahadur sahani ordered whereupon shiv kumar sahani shot at causing injury to his brother rambaboo sahani who, after sustaining injury fell down. thereafter, they have .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Apr-19-2014
i.a. ansari, j. 1. this appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 3.11.2012, passed, in sessions trial no. 596 of 2009, by the learned additional sessions judge-i, nalanda, at biharsharif, convicting the accused appellant, namely, manoj mahto, under section 302 read with section 34 of the indian penal code consequent upon his conviction as mentioned hereinbefore, he has been sentenced, by order, dated 10.11.2012, to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of rs.10,000/- and, in default of payment, suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. 2. the case of the prosecution may, in brief, be described as hereunder:- (i) deceased pinki kumari @ babita kumari was wife of accused manoj mahto, the marriage between the two having been solemnized in the year 2001. the couple had a female child and used to reside, on rent, in the house of one bodh narain, at mohalla kamruddinganj, police station laheri, biharsharif. (ii) on 20.1.2009, at about 7 am, dinesh mahto (p.w.3), brother of the deceased pinki pumari, received information, on his mobile, that pinki kumari had been killed by her husband, namely, manoj mahto, in the rental house situated, at mohalla kamruddinganj, police station laheri. on receiving the information, p.w.3, accompanied by his father, arjun mahto (pw 5) and others came to the house, where pinki kumari used to live with the accused. they found pinkis dead body lying by the side of the kitchen in a pool of blood with several injuries on her body. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : May-07-2014
s.p. singh, j. 1. under challenge, in the present appeals, are the judgment, dated 11.06.2008, of conviction, in sessions trial no. 243 of 1997, by learned additional sessions judge, fast track court no. v, begusarai, and the order, dated 13.06.2008, whereby various sentences have been passed against the accused-appellants. 2. by the impugned judgment, the learned trial court has convicted the accused-appellant, anil kumar mahto @ kunnan mahto, under section 302 of the indian penal code and section 27 of the arms act, 1959. the accused-appellant, siyaram mahto, has been, under the impugned judgment, convicted under sections 302 read with 34 of the indian penal code, section 302 read with section 114 of the indian penal code and 341 of the indian penal code. so far as the remaining three accused-appellants, namely, birendra mahto, surendra mahto and manoj mahto are concerned, they have been, under the impugned judgment, convicted under sections 302 read with section 34 of the indian penal code, section 302 read with 114 of the indian penal code and 341 of the indian penal code. for his conviction under section 302 of the indian penal code, the accused-appellant, anil kumar mahto @ kunnan mahto, has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of rs. 10,000/0 and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and, for his conviction under section 27 of the arms act, 1959, the accused-appellant, anil kumar mahto @ kunnan mahto, has .....Tag this Judgment!