Jharkhand Court February 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sudha Pandey Vs. Smt. Leela Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC450
1. Madan Mohan Pandey, husband of appellant, Sudha Pandey, was employed as helper in area No. 3 of M/s Bharal Coking Coal Limited at Gobindpur Colliery. He was drawing a salary of Rs. 3,300/- per month.2. On 11.11.1989, while going on a Jeep (BHD-9642) from Bhuli to Gobindpur Colliery to attend his duty, near Sahid Chowk on Hirak Road at Dhanbad, a truck (BHR-8993) dashed against the Jeep, as a result of which Jeep fell into a ditch and Madan Mohan Pandey sustained serious injury and died on spot.3. The deceased was 28 year's old at the time of accident and after his death the appellant, being his wife, was given employment on compassionate ground by M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and she was drawing a salary of Rs. 2,600/- per month.4. In the claim case, filed by appellant, it was established that accident took place onaccount of rash and negligent driving of the truck, which was owned by Leela Devi, wife of Narayana Pandey and was insured with Oriental Insurance Company Limited, res...
Ramdhani Mahto and 12 ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR531
D.N. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed under Section 482, Cr. P.C. for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 1.3.2001 for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 147, 148, 149, 504 and 34, IPC and also under Sections 3 and 4 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, 1989.2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the Court below has committed error in transferring the case to the higher Court, although he has got no power to transfer the same as well as there was no such provision made out in the Code ofCriminal Procedure and it should have been committed to the Court of Special Judge, who is specially empowered to try the cases of Attrocities Act. It is further stated that this case has been registered due to animosity and with mala fide intention, which will be evident that a proceeding under Section 107, Cr. P.C. has already been initiated between the parties from before.3. From perusa...
General Manager, Bhaat Coking Coal Limited Vs. Smt. Suma Devi and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: III(2002)ACC606
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. Title (MV) Suit No. 2 of 1998, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') was filed jointly by mother and wife of deceased Gupu Modak for granting compensation. The deceased had lost his life in a motor accident on 2.3.1995.2. It was asserted that while going on a bicycle from Madhuban to Mali godown, Gupu Modak was dashed by a water tanker (dumper) No. 106 and as a result of which he sustained injuries and died.3. A separate application under Section 140 of the Act was also filed in the said case.4. The claimants failed to pay requisite Court-fee for the claim application filed under Section 166 of the Act. They expressed their inability to pay Court-fee on account of poverty. Hence, their application under Section 166 of the Act was dismissed on 4.2.1998.5. However, Tribunal entertained their application under Section 140 of the Act and by impugned order dated 7.3.1998, in absence of any denial by the order, ...
Asiya Shah Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1037
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner Asiya Shah, has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to accept her admission in the M.B.B.S. course at the Rajendra Medical College. Ranchi for the Session starting from 2001. According to the petitioner she had been selected in the Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination. 2001 (J.C.E.C.E.) and her application was duly forwarded for Counselling but even thereafter, the Principal of the said college refused admission on the ground that she does not fulfil the residential eligibility.2. This case was heard at length and both Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Senior Advocate and Mr. Pradip Modi, learned G.P.I. argued and represented their respective clients.3. According to the petitioner, she has born on 4th of August. 1982 at Jamshedpur and she completed her scholastic life in the Little Flower School at Telco Colony. Jamshedpur where she studied from K.G. to Class 12th. The petitioner states that in the mean time, she a...
Director, Soil Conservation Department, Damodar Valley Corporation, Ha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC184; [2002(95)FLR391]
1. Sudan Sao, respondent No. .1 was employed with the contractor. Lav Kumar, respondent No, 3.2. The said contractor was engaged by Soil Conservation Department, Damodar Valley Corporation, Hazaribagh, for earth cutting under Agreement No. SCE Tender-6 of 1983-84 for E/D-2 Dary at Khadaiya for a period of four months, commencing form 6.9.1983.3. Sudan Sao filed an application under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Labour Court for compensation.4. According to him on 10.12.1993,awhile he was doing earth work under thecontractor. Lav Kumar. he sustained injury inhis right leg on account of an accident. It wascaused by fall of a big palas tree upon him.5. Both Director. Soil Conservation Department of Damodar Valley Corporation as well as contractor filed separate show cause and contested the claim case.6. On behalf of Damodar Valley Corporation it was accepted that injured-claimant was engaged by the contractor for d...
Mostt. Baso OraIn and ors. Vs. Narender Timber and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC701
1. Charwa Oraon of Village Inta. District-Lohardaga died on 15.10.1987, when he was knocked by a truck (8RN-8021), near village Shramgatu.2. His widow, sons and daughters filed Claim Case under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. The impugned judgment and award was passed thereon directing the insurer of the offending truck to pay a sum of Rs. 43,200/- as compensation amount and a sum of Rs. 500/- for repair of the damaged cycle. A direction was also given to pay interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim case till payment.4. The claimants have preferred the present appeal for enhancement of the aforesaid amount of compensation on the ground that after assessing annual dependency at Rs. 4800/-. a lump sum amount of Rs. 43,200/-was assessed without applying appropriate multiplier as per Devis formula recognised by the Apex Court in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Susamma Thomas and other, ...
Smt. Shukarmani Devi Vs. Krishna Pandey and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2002
Reported in: 2004ACJ151
1. Madan Gorain. husband of appellant was travelling on a Trekkar (BPW-6196) on 30.9.1983 while coming from village Dewatarn within Dhanbad district to attend his work at Putki. The said Trekker dashed against a rickshaw on the way near Syndicate Bank, Dhanbad, and met with an accident in which Madan Gorain died.2. His widow made an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. for compensation of Rs. 1,20,000/-. It was registered as Title (M.V.) Suit No. 147 of 1993.3. No documentary evidence in respect of earnings of the deceased, who was 35 year's old was produced. However, the oral evidence on behalf of claimant was brought on record that the deceased was a daily wage earner and was earning Rs. 30/- to 33/- per day.4. In absence of any positive evidence of actual amount of earnings of the deceased, the tribunal assessed annual dependency at 3000/- and applied 16 multiplier thereto. Thus total amount of Rs. 48,000/- was calculated to be paid to her as compensation, ...
Pritam Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR527; 2002CriLJ3295
D.N. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in C.P. Case No. 242/ 2000 including the order dated 19.7.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, whereby and whereunder the took cognizance against the petitioners for the offence under Section 341, 323, 384, 379 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code.2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that this complaint case has been filed as regards to the occurrence dated 29.1.2000 for which the police case was already registered for the same occurrence as being Chirkunda PS Case No. 14/2000 under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 34, IPC for the same day of occurrence i.e. 29.1.2000. It is also submitted that the Court below committed error for issuance of non-bailable warrant on the same date of taking cognizance without issuing summons in this case, though the petitionershad already appeared in the case registeredbefore the police.3. There ap...
Dipti Mookerjee and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(1)BLJR575
D.N. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for grant of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari or an order or direction for quashing the entire criminal prosecution well as the including the order dated 29-11 -2001 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 789 of 2001, whereby under the provisions of Section 156(iii) of the code of Criminal Procedure, complaint petitioner has been referred to the Lalpur Police Station for institution of an FIR and for submission of final form after investigation.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the whole allegation has been concocted in order to harass the petitioners as there was already an agreement in 1986 and period has already expired and this complaint case has been filed only because of the fact that one Kumud Kumar Jha was appointed as Attorney on 10-8-2001, with an allegation of mala fide intention. It is also submitted tha...
Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Reba Rani Mazumdar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-12-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC587; [2003(97)FLR776]
ORDER1. S.K. Mazumdar, husband of sole-respondent herein was working as Assistant Procurement Officer with M/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Limited, the appellant herein.2. On 25.5.1985, he was called by his superiors in the afternoon to attend a Price Panel meeting Scheduled to be held in the office of the Divisional Manager (Central Materials). He went there and was waiting in Secretary's room, when he suddenly fell down and became unconscious. He was immediately rushed to TELCO Hospital, where he subsequently died of severe Myocardial infarction.3. The deceased was working under the Company for last 37 years and at the time of his death, he was 57 year's old and was getting salary of more than Rs. 1,000/-which was relevant for the purpose of calculating compensation under Section 4 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').4. His widow filed W.C. No. 4 of 1988, under the provisions of the Act and claimed a sum of Rs. 51,332/- as lump-...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »