Jharkhand Court February 2001 Judgments
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mukte MajhaIn and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-28-2001
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ1575Jhar
ORDERGurusharan Sharma, J.1. Heard Mr. Alok Lal,counsel for the appellant and Mr. M.B. Lal, counsel for respondents 5 and 6. In spite of appearance, nobody is present on behalf of respondent No. 1. Title (M.V.) Claim Suit No. 30 of 1998 was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in respect of motor accident dated 11.2.1998, wherein Darka Manjhi died and Maruti Car (WB -02B-4417) owned by respondent No. 5 wasinvolved. The said car was duly insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. On the basis of materials on record, it was held that accident took place on account of fault of driver of the car and a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- was directed to be paid as compensation amount with interest @ 12% per annum. In paragraph 12 of the judgment, it was observed that owner and driver of the vehicle filed written statement, but did not contest the case and also failed to produce the driving licence, which according to Insurance Company was not valid and effective. It was further observe...
Tag this Judgment!Tusher Kanti Mukherjee Vs. Meena Singh and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-26-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC723
ORDERGurusharan Sharma, J.1. Heard the parties. This appeal has been filed by owner of Matador (BHH-8304), which was involved in a motor accident dated 16.3.1988, challenging part of impugned judgment and award dated 15.4.1993, passed in Misc. Judicial Case No. 81 of 1988, whereby he was asked to pay Rs. 65.200/- as compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939, to the claimant- respondent No. 1 herein. The appeal was hopelessly barred by time and so petition for condonation of delay has been filed. In the present case, owner appeared in the claim case but for some reason did not contest. However, after final award was made, he filed an application for review of the order/award, whereby he was asked to pay part of compensation amount and Insurer was directed to indemnify his liability to the extent of only Rs. 50,000/-. The said Review application was entertained, but was ultimately rejected on 30.7.1998. So, initially the present appeal was filed against the said order, which, in my...
Tag this Judgment!Shivjee Singh Alias Shivjee Chaudhary Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(49)BLJR1749
Deoki Nandan Prasad, J. 1. This application has been field under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Barisole PS Case No. 14/98 dated 28.3.1998 including the order dated 2.1.1999 whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act was taken and also issued warrant of arrest and processes under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr PC against the petitioner. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, as stated that the informant, Prakhand Supply Officer, Bahragor (Barsole) and other officials raided the godown of the petitioner/ Sheojee Singh where it was found that a tanker bearing registration No. WMK 8332 was standing. Another tanker bearing registration No. WB/33-3266 was also found standing at that place. There was also one Motor Cycle kept there and there were Jars of 35 litres of capacity containing 30 litres of Kerosin Oil of each jars. It was also found thatKerosin Oil of ea...
Tag this Judgment!Chhotanagpur Small Scale Industries Association Vs. the State of Bihar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(49)BLJR981; [2001(90)FLR81]; (2001)IILLJ1138Jhar
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. L.K. Bajla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.K. Marathia, learned GP 2 and with their consent this writ application is disposed of at this stage.2. In this writ application the petitioner, who is the Association of the owners of the small scale industries has challenged the Notification dated 22.10.1999 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Department of Labour, Employment and Training revising the rate of clearness allowance earlier notified by Notification dated 25.5.1998.3. Mr. Bajla mainly contended that the respondents-authorities have issued the impugned notification revising the dearness allowance without observing the direction of this Court in the order passed in CWJC No. 2698/98 (R). Learned counsel submitted that in the earlier notification dated 25.5.1998 the rates of VDA at CPI 1972 was notified and the total wages worked out to 39.70 + 11.31 = 51.01 per day. This Court found a prima facie error in calculation...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Ranchi Vs. Jashmani Kongari and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ155
ORDERGuru Sharan Sharma, J.1. Heard the parties and with their consent, this appeal is disposed of under Order 41, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, On 22.12.1992, one Samuel Kongari, aged about 45 years, was travelling on Tata 407 Bus (BR 14-8786). He was sitting on the roof of the bus. In between Gumla and Jitutoli, at Lasiamor, on account of rash and negligent drive of the bus, he was thrown away from the roof of the bus and died. His widow filed MJC No. 11 of 1993, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for compensation. It was established that accident took place for the fault of driver of the bus. It was also established that out of his earnings, the deceased was spending a sum of Rs. 1,000/- every month for maintenance of his family. So, annual dependency was calculated at Rs. 12,000/- and 15 multiplier was used. Thus, total amount of compensation was calculated at Rs. 1,80,000/-. The insurance paper of the vehicle, involved in the accident, was brought on reco...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Laxmi and ors. Vs. K. Simachalan @ Simachalan
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(49)BLJR762
ORDERGurusharan Sharma, J. 1. Heard. One K. Shankar Rao. who was employed in SMS III Department of Tisco Ltd., died in harness,-on 25.8.1996. In respect of total settlement dues of Rs. 3.53.151/- with Tisco Ltd. Smt. Vijay Laxmi with her minor son and daughter filed Succession Certificate Case No. 97 of 1996 for grant of succession certificate, which has been dismissed by impugned order, dated 20.8.1999. Smt. Vijay Laxmi claimed herself to have been married with K. Shankar Rao on 24.10.1983. after death of her first husband, M. Satyanarayan. During his life time. K. Shankar Rao himself had appointed her as beneficiary in respect of Limited employees scheme. Ext. 1. As employees of Tisco. the deceased was a member under the said scheme. In his insurance policy. Ext. 2, he had described Smt. Vijay Laxmi as his wife and mentioned her name as nominee. 2. Smt. K. Simachalan, mother of deceased, K. Shankar Rao filed objection to the grant of succession certificate to Smt. Vijay Laxmi and her...
Tag this Judgment!Employers in Relation to the Management of Amlabad Colliery of Bharat ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(49)BLJR1676; [2001(89)FLR1044]; (2001)IILLJ1287Jhar
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.K. Ughal, teamed counsel for the respondents.2. In this writ application, the petitioner, namely, the Management of Amlabad Colliery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited challenged the Award, dated 22.1.1993 passed by Central Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 105 of 1991 answering the reference in favour of the workmen.3. It appears that Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of power conferred on them under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication :'Whether the demand of the Union for reinstatement of Md. Zubair Alam as Auto Electrician with back wages w.e.f. 11.12.1989 on account of illegal stoppage from work by the Management of Amlabad Colliery of M/s. BCCL is justified If so, to what relief the workman is entitled ?'4. The case of the workman Md. Zubair is that he was employed as Auto Electr...
Tag this Judgment!B. Akala (Balaswamy Akala) Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(49)BLJR1636
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Sinha, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. B. Mohanti, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 and Mr. N.N. Sinha, learned Standing Counsel, Central Government.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 14.2.2001 issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of India whereby and where-under respondent No. 4, Mr. N.K. Shar-ma has been made as Acting in charge of Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Coal India Limited and further for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to appoint the petitioner as regular Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Coal India Ltd.3. It appears that on 1.10.2000 the post of Chairman, Coal India Limited became vacant after retirement of Mr. P.K. Sengupta. The respondent Nos. 1 to 3 proceeded with the selection process for the aforesaid post and a panel of selected candidates was prepared in June, 2000 wherein the petitioner was placed at Serial No. 1 while responde...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Ranchi Vs. Sairun Biwi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC115; 2002ACJ1476; 2001(49)BLJR2027; [2006(4)JCR27(Jhr)]
ORDERGurusharan Sharma, J.1. Heard the parties and with their consent this appeal is disposed of under Order XLI, Rule 11 of theCode of Civil Procedure. By impugned judgment and award, dated 5.2.1999, appellant was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 4,07,800 to claimants-respondents 1 to 5 as compensation, under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Further, direction was given that if the Insurance Company fails to pay the compensation amount within 4 months from the date of impugned order, the claimants would be entitled to get interest 12% per annum on the amount of compensation. In the present appeal, filed by Insurance Company, under Section 173 of the said Act, award impugned has been challenged only to the extent that claimants were not entitled to get more than Rs. 3,59,156/-, which was claimed by them. It is not in dispute that on 13.8.1992, one Juman Mian, who was a passenger on a tracker (BR-17(B)-6369), died, when the said tracker met accident. It was also not in dis...
Tag this Judgment!Shivam Coko (P) Ltd. Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: 2001(49)BLJR1058
ORDER1. Heard.2. The point of controversy involved in this case is indeed very short and simple. Almost all the factual aspects of the contioversy forming subject matter of the writ petition are also admitted.3. The petitioner M/s. Shivam Coke (P) Ltd. is, admittedly, a dealer within the scope and ambit of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. Admittedly also, under Section 7 of this Act, the State Government is empowered to grant exemption from payment of Sales Tax on purchase of raw materials. Undoubtedly, a notification under the aforesaid Section 7 of the Act was issued on 22.9.1995 vide S.O. No. 478 whereby, subject to the terms and conditions contained therein, it was provided that the dealers whose production started between 1995-2000 were entitled to grant of exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials. It is also an undisputed case of the parties that the petitioner comes within the scope and ambit of this notification and was entitled to grant of exemption having ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »