Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: patna Page 1050 of about 10,511 results (0.191 seconds)

Nov 19 1991 (HC)

Nagina Singh and ors. Vs. Most. Sheojoti Kuer and ors.

Court : Patna

Binod Kumar Roy, J. 1. In this appeal defendants Nos. 7 to 9 assail validity of an order dated 7-5-1987 rejecting their petition filed against appointment of a receiver. 2. It appears that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 filed the suit in question for partition of their shares in Schedules II, III and IV properties of their plaint. The plaint was admitted on 29-11-1985 and the notices were issued to the defendants on 10-5-1986. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 filed an application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner Receiver for preparing a list of the disputed lands and for managing them and for directing him to get the standing crops thereon cut and divided. Notice of the said petition was directed to be issued to the defendants on 10-4-1986. The hearing of the said petition, however, was deferred because of non-service of notice on the defendants. From the record it appears that on 11-9-1986 the notices were issued under registered cover. It further appears that on 24-9-1986 the petition...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1991 (HC)

Ruby Construction Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Sachchidanand Jha, J. 1. This revision by the plaintiff arises out of a suit under the Indian Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The prayer in the suit is to call for the arbitration agreement and enter upon the arbitration in respect of the disputes between the parties after superseding the arbitration clause providing for making reference of the disputes to the Superintending Engineer as sole Arbitrator. In the alternative, a prayer has been made that the plaint may be registered as a regular suit and a decree as per the claims made therein be passed in favour of the plaintiff. 2. It is not necessary to state the facts giving rise to the present revision in detail, for the purpose of decision on the points arising for consideration. Suffice it to say that the plaintiff, which is a registered partnership firm, entered into an agreement for construction of Revetment and Slope Protection Work on the right bank of river Ganga from Ranighat to Gulabjghat at Patna, w...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 1989 (HC)

Dr. Sanjay Kumar Sinha and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1989Pat241; 1989(37)BLJR331

1. This is one more instance where in spite of directions given by the Supreme Court in 1987, the State Government, for reason which it termed as "larger interest", have issued prospectus for Post-Graduate Medical Admission Test, 1989, informing that for the purpose of admission, inter alia, the candidate must complete twelve months of house job latest by_31st_May,_1989. This is in regard to admission to post-graduate courses which in terms of the orders of the Supreme Court must commence on 2nd May, 1989. It was also stated that the candidates who are not expected to complete twelve months of house job by 31st May, 1989 are not eligible to appear at the test.2. The petitioners have filed this writ petition in which they have prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ/order commanding the State of Bihar to start Post-Graduate courses in medical science from 2nd May, 1989 and not to extend the eligibility date for completion of twelve months house job/housemanship up to 31st May, 1989 i...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 1988 (HC)

Ram Lakhan Missir Vs Pandit Raghunandan Missir

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1989Pat145

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition. The plaintiff is the appellant. The relationship between the parties is shown in the genealogical table in schedule A of the plaint. The properties in which the plaintiff claims partition are shown in Schedules B, C and D of the plaint. The learned Subordinate Judge rejected the plaintiff's claim for partition and dismissed the suit. 2. The genealogical table given by the plaintiff in his plaint was not challenged by the defendants. Hence the genealogical table is given below to show the undisputed relationship between the parties : -- Schedule"A" Deonath Missir ______________________________________________________________________________ Saligram Missir Akshyabat Missir Bigu Chakarpani Thakur ___________|________ _________|____ Missir Missir Missir | | | | | | | _____|_____ Parsuram Nini Nr Jadab Lachmi Nr Ram Pratap Mahadev | | | I Missir Missir Missir Missir (df.7) Missir | Gopinath Janar da | | | | | | Missir Missi r | | | Kapurwa...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 1988 (HC)

Ram Lakhan Missir Vs. Pandit Raghunandan Missir

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1989Pat145

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition. The plaintiff is the appellant. The relationship between the parties is shown in the genealogical table in schedule A of the plaint. The properties in which the plaintiff claims partition are shown in Schedules B, C and D of the plaint. The learned Subordinate Judge rejected the plaintiff's claim for partition and dismissed the suit.2. The genealogical table given by the plaintiff in his plaint was not challenged by the defendants. Hence the genealogical table is given below to show the undisputed relationship between the parties : -- Schedule"A"Deonath Missir______________________________________________________________________________ Saligram Missir Akshyabat Missir Bigu Chakarpani Thakur ___________|________ _________|____ Missir Missir Missir | | | | | | | _____|_____ Parsuram Nini Nr Jadab Lachmi Nr Ram Pratap Mahadev | | | I Missir Missir Missir Missir (df.7) Missir | Gopinath Janar da| | | | | | Missir Missi r| | | Kapurwa...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 18 1986 (HC)

Harihar Prasad Debuka and Etc . Vs . State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1987Pat175; [1987]66STC178(Pat)

S.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.1. The significant issue that emerges for adjudication in this reference to the Full Bench is whether the Notification No. S.O. 1432, dt. 28th Nov., 1985, issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2a) of Section 31 of the Bihar Finance Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') prescribing the declaration form to be carried on a goods carrier or a vessel for transporting goods through the State of Bihar during the course of inter-State trade, is violative of the freedom of trade guaranteed by Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution Equally at issue is a minor cleavage of judicial opinion within this Court betwixt two Division Bench orders passed at the motion stage.2. In the context of the aforesaid pristinely legal question, the facts inevitably pale into relative insignificance. These may, therefore, be briefly noticed from Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 990 of 1986 (R). The petitioner therein is the proprietor of M/s. Jai Durga Industries --...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1986 (HC)

Mohanlal Agarwal Vs. Bank of Baroda and ors.

Court : Patna

P.K. Deb, J.1. en preferred by the abovenamed defendant No. 3-appellant against the judgment and decree dated 11.8.1986 and 26.8.1986 respectively passed by the then 3rd Additional Subordinate Judge, Jamshedpur in Money Suit No. 72 of 1983/3 of 1986, by which the plaintiffs suit for recovery of Rs. 25,350.70 ps. together with interest thereof at the rate of 17 per cent per annum from 26.3.1983 to 10.8.1986 with future interest at the rate of 17 per cent per annum till the date of realisation alongwith cost of the suit has been decreed.2. The plaintiff-respondent is a Banking company having its head office at Mandri, Baroda (Gujrat) and branch office at Golmuri, P.S. Golmuri, town Jamshedpur, District-Singhbhum East. The defendant No. 2 is the sole proprietor of defendant No. 1 carrying on business of cloth at 79, Jhanda Chowk, Sakchi Market, Jamshedpur in the name and style of M/s : Sri Niwas Textiles. The defendant No. 2 for pecuniary assistance in the business applied in 1972 to the...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 1986 (HC)

Bihar State Electricity Board Vs. Khalsa Brothers

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1988Pat304

Lalit Mohan Sharma, J.1. This appeal under Section 39 of the Indian Arbitration Act. 1940 is directed against the decision of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Patna, making the Award of an Arbitrator a rule of the Court after certain modification.2. The parties to the appeal entered into a contract for making certain constructions. The respondent-firm undertook to execute the work as per the agreement dt/-12-9-1969. The work commenced in Sept. 1969 but could not proceed after a few months. Certain differences arose between the respondent and the appellant-Electricity Board, the other contracting party, and the dispute was, as per the agreement, referred to the arbitration of Sri P.R. Guha, Chief Engineer (Retired), River Valley Project Department, Bihar. The parties filed their written statements and fully participated in the proceeding before the Arbitrator. Ultimately, an Award was made and filed in court in Aug. 1972. The appellant raised several objections against the Award, and a...

Tag this Judgment!

May 22 1985 (HC)

Gulab Chand Prasad Vs. Budhwanti and anr.

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1985Pat327; 1985(33)BLJR3181985

1. Whether the excess rent paid by the tenant to his landlord, consequent upon a mutual (though illegal) enhancement of rent would be automatically adjusted against all subsequent defaults in payment of monthly rent for purposes of Sections 4, 5 and 11 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947, is the significant question which necessitates this reference to the Full Bench. Equally at issue is the correctness of the view in the unreported Division Bench judgment of Ramjit Singh v. Shanti Devi, Second Appeal No. 257 of 1977 decided on 16th August, 1979.2. The plaintiff had brought the suit for eviction, inter alia, on the grounds of default in the payment of rent and personal necessity and had claimed a sum of Rs. 540/- as arrears of rent. The case set up on his behalf was that his brother Babu Lal was earlier the karta and manager of the joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu Law and the disputed premises belonged to the plaintiff, which...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1984 (HC)

Deonarayan Singh and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Bhagalpur Division and o ...

Court : Patna

Reported in : AIR1985Pat196; 1985(33)BLJR185

S.S. Sandha Walia, C.J.1. Whether the prescriptive period of twelve years for perfecting the title by adverse possession (the original transfer being in contravention of Section 27 of Regulation 3 of 1872} would stop running from the 1st of Nov. 1949, being the date of the enforcement of the Santhal Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 1949-- is the significant solitary question arising from a deep-seated conflict of precedents within this Court which has necessitated this reference to the Full Bench.2. The facts deserve notice within the narrow confines of their relevance to the issue aforesaid. The whole dispute focusses on Jamabandi No. 65 of Mouza Billi, police station Madhupur, which is recorded as Mulraiyat-ka jote in the name of Sitaram Singh 8 annas Mulraiyat of the said Mouza and Jaleshwar Singh, Yudhisthir Singh and Kesturi Devi. The plot stands recorded in the names of different co-sharers. By a sale deed dt. 22nd March, 1939, 38.09 acres of land were sold to one...

Tag this Judgment!


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