Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: patna Page 1049 of about 10,511 results (0.208 seconds)

Sep 07 1992 (HC)

Firoz Khan and ors. Vs. Bibi Hasina Khanam and ors.

Court : Patna

1. In a suit instituted in 1970 protracting for about nine years with both the plaintiffs and the court hopefully but vainly waiting for the defendants to appear and contest the suit, an ex parte decree was ultimately passed on 13-1-1979. Appellant No. 1 joined by his three brothers attempted to get the decree set aside by an application under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code (in short 'the Code'). Having failed, he along with the two non-applicants has filed this miscellaneous appeal. 2. The suit was instituted by one Deoki Singh for self and as guradian of his minor daughter for partition against his Sita Ram Singh, defendant No. 1 in the suit, on the plea that Sita had fallen in bad company, become wayward and was squandering away property. The plaintiffs impleaded Ful Kunari Devi, Deoki's wife, as proforma defendant 2nd party and the transferees as proforma defendants 3rd party. Some other transferees from Sita Ram, including the applicants/ appellants were added as proform...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1992 (HC)

Arya Prathamick Teachers Siksha Mahavidyalaya and ors. Vs. the Bihar S ...

Court : Patna

1. In this application the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a direction upon the Bihar School Examination Board to publish the results of the students of the petitioner No. 1 College for the Sessions 1983-85, 1984-86 and 1985-87. 2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass. 3. The petitioner No. 1 is an institution established for imparting training to Primary School Teachers. The said school was established in the year 1979. 4. The permission was sought for from the respondent No. 1 by the petitioner so that the students of the said institution who have been given training may appear at the examination. 5. The petitioners in that connection filed a writ application in this court being CWJC No. 4863 of 1985, but this court did not permit the students to appear in the examination for the Sessions 1983-85. 6. The petitioners thereafter moved the Supreme Court of India in S.L.P. (C) No. 6890 of 1986 and by an order dated 18-7-1986 the students of the petitioner's Insti...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 1992 (HC)

Life Insurance Corporation Class I Officers' Sahakari Grih Nirman Sami ...

Court : Patna

Binod Kumar Roy, J. 1. Since common questions of facts and law are involved in these two writ applications which in terms of order dated 4-3-1992 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5878 of 1991 have been together, are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In C.W.J.C. No. 380 of 1990 the petitioners pray to quash the communication dated 2-4-1987 (as contained in Annexure-5) of the Sub-Registrar, Danapur (Respondent No. 4) addressed to the Collector, Patna (Respondent No. 2) impounding the sale deed dated 30-3-1987 of the petitioners under Section 33 of the Stamp Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) and for restraining the Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 from proceeding further with Impound Case No. 43 of 1988-89 started against petitioner No. 1. 3. In C.W.J.C. No. 5878 of 1991 the petitioners pray to quash a similar communication, though dated 20-3-1987 of Respondent No. 4 addressed to the Collector, Patna (Respondent No. 2) impounding the sale deed dated 19-3-1987 of the petitioners u...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 1992 (HC)

Dhirendra Agrawal Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

1. Heard learned counsel for thepetitioner as also the learned Advocates,appearing for the Department of Mines andGeology and the Divisional Forest Officer,Gaya. 2. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents not to obstruct with the mining operation over an area for which a valid mining lease has been granted by the competent authority. It is stated that with respect to an area of 6.90 acres of land, in Mauza Naili (Kushdira) Plot No. 1 (Part) in the district of Gaya, initially a lease was granted for stone crushing on 6-3-1976. The said lease was renewed from time to time and ultimately at last on 19-7-1991 it was renewed for a period of five years by the District Mining Officer, Gaya. In a revision Case No. 23 of 1991, filed by the petitioner, the period of five years was enhanced to 10 years by the Mines Commissioner in accordance with the Government policy. 3. Counter-affidavits on behalf of the respondents have already been filed in this c...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 1992 (HC)

Munni Sao and Etc. Vs. K.D. Sharma and ors.

Court : Patna

Nagendra Rai, J. 1. As the common question of law arises in both the revision applications, with the consent of the parties, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Civil Revision No. 1443/85 is directed against the order dated 5-6-1985, passed by the Munsif II, Gaya, in T. S. No. 39/84, holding that the suit filed by the plaintiff-petitioner for grant of permanent injunction has abated under Section 4(c) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. Civil Revision No. 1228/87 is directedagainst the order dated 8-6-1987, passed by the Munsif, Second Court, Samastipur, in T. S. No. 89/82, holding that the suit filed by the plaintiff-petitioner for permanent injunction was not maintainable under S. 4(b) of the Act. 4. Both the cases have been referred to a Division Bench of this Court for an authoritative pronouncement on the question as to whether the provisions of Section 4...

Tag this Judgment!

May 21 1992 (HC)

Santosh Singh and ors. Vs. Ram Chandra Sah and ors.

Court : Patna

Nagendra Rai, J. 1. The defendants-' tenants have filed the present revision application against the order dated 11-1-1988 passed by Munsif, 1st Court, Samastipur in Misc. Case No. 6 of 1987 by which he has rejected the application of the petitioners under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter to be referred to as the Code) for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 29-4-1987 passed in Title Suit No. 1 of 1987 on the ground that the aforesaid application was not maintainable in view of the specific provisions contained in Section 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). 2. Primary question for determination in the present case is as to what is the remedy available in law to a tenant to challenge an order of eviction passed against him under Section 14(4) of the Act on the ground that the said order was passed without service of summons on him for his appearance. 3. As the point inv...

Tag this Judgment!

May 15 1992 (HC)

Amerendra Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

S.B. Sinha, J. 1. All these writ applications involving common questions of law and fact were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioner in these applications has prayed for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to perform his statutory duties by setting the claim of the petitioner pending before them in terms of the provisions of Bihar Public Works Account Code and Bihar Financial Rules. 3. According to the petitioner, he entered into contracts with the State and the works pursuant thereto have been completed and (found) to be satisfactory by the concerned respondents. 4. According to the petitioner, bills were prepared in respect of the works done by the petitioner, but the respondent No. 4 in stead of making a full payment has made only a part payment in respect thereof. 5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner at the very outset submitted that the petitioner in these applications is ...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 17 1992 (HC)

Most. Sukhia and anr. Vs. Took NaraIn Whish Wakarma and ors.

Court : Patna

S. Ali Ahmad, J. 1. This second appeal arisesout of a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of Rs. 5001/- (Rs. 4000/- principal and Rs. 1001/- by way of interest). The suit was dismissed, on appeal the same was decreed, and thereafter this Second Appeal. 2. Shortly stated, the facts of this case are that the defendant-appellant No. 1 Most. Sukhia executed a usufructuary mortgage deed on the 7th of December, 1973 after receiving Rs. 4000/-. It was stated in the deed that in case the plaintiff did not get possession of the mortgage house, then the interest at the rate of Rs. 1 / - per month will be payable. It is said that possession of the house in question could not be taken by the plaintiff. Thereafter the suit was filed for realisation of Rs. 5001/-(including interest). The debtor Most. Sukhia was impleaded as defendant No. 1. Her son and daughter were also made defendants. 3. The suit was contested by defendant No. 1 mainly on the ground that she was a scheduled de...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1992 (HC)

Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Agricultural P ...

Court : Patna

B. C. Basak, C. J. 1. These series of 28 writ petitions involve similar facts and common questions of law so far as the main submissions are concerned and for this reason they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. In some of these writ petitions some additional points are urged which were special to them. These writ petitions relate to the following 'agricultural produce', namely, (1) Wheat and wheat products e.g., Atta, Maida, Suji and bran, (ii) oil seeds, edible oil mustard oil, (in) sugar and (iv) Vanaspati.2. (a) C.W.J.C. Nos. 3920/85, 1201/86, 3930/86, 1222/87, 1228/87, 1272/87, 1273/87, 1333/87, 1926/87, 3810/87, 4278/87, 4289/87, 5831/87, 2354/88, 3863/88, 4497/88, 4623/88, 4803/88, 7912/88, 8705/88 and 5187/89.Excepting in CWJC 3920/85 all these applications are at the instance of flour mills which have been set up either by a Company incorporated under the Companies Act or by a partnership firm. They carry on the business of manufacturin...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 16 1992 (HC)

Jai Shankar Prasad Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1993Pat22; 1992(40)BLJR309

1. This writ petition was moved praying for an appropriate writ order in the nature of qua warranto for "ousting respondent No. 6 from the office of the Member of Bihar Public Service Commission" (hereinafter referred to as "the Commission") on the allegation that he has illegally usurped the same and that he is not entitled to continue.2. The petitioner claims to be a practising Advocate of this Court. The respondents in this petition are State of Bihar (respondent No. 1), the Secretary, personnel and Administrative Reforms Department (respondent No. 2), the Joint Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department (respondent No. 3), the Commission through its Secretary (respondent No. 4), the Chairman of the Commission (respondent No. 5), Dr. Shiv Jatan Thakur, Associate Professor, English Department, B. N. College, Patna, a Member of the Commission (respondent No. 6) and the Union of India (respondent No. 7),3. We may point out that surprisingly enough Mr. Katriar, learned A...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //