Jharkhand Court June 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.
Prabhat Kumar Mitra Vs. Smt. Sikha Mitra
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-14-2002
Reported in: II(2002)DMC444
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 17.4.1997 passed in First Appeal No. 2 of 1992 (R), whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decree dated 24.9.1991 passed by 3rd Additional District Judge, Jarashedpur in Matrimonial Suit No. 37 of 1989.2. The plaintiff-appellant had filed Matrimonial Suit No. 37 of 1989 against his wife, respondent for a dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the grounds of desertion and cruelty.3. Plaintiffs case inter alia was that he was married with the respondent according to the Hindu custom on 29.4.1980 in village Onda in the district of Bankura, West Bengal. After the solemnisation of marriage the respondent came with the appellant to his house at Jamshedpur and according to the Bengali custom 'Full Sajjya' was held on 1.5.1980. It was alleged by the plaintiff that respondent on that very night started quarrel with him and on the next day the plain...
Tata Workers' Union Vs. Union of India
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-14-2002
Reported in: [2002]123TAXMAN426(NULL)
V.K. Gupta, C.J.By this common judgment, we propose to dispose of the abovementioned batch of writ applications wherein the vires and legality of Notification No. SO 940(E) dated 25-9-2001 has been challenged. Vide this impugned Notification, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Government of India in the Ministry of Finance has brought about amendment in the Income Tax Rules, 1962. We are concerned in this batch of petitions only with respect to the substitution of new rule 3 with the old one.2. Substituted rule 3 reads thus :'3. Valuation of perquisites.For the purpose of computing the income chargeable under the head 'salaries' the value of perquisites provided by the employer directly or indirectly to the assessee (hereinafter referred to as employee) or to any member of his household by reason of his employment shall be determined in accordance with the following sub-rules, namely :(1) The value of residential accommodation provided by the employer during the ...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bok ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1435; [2002(94)FLR981]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 13.2.97 passed in CWJC No. 2916/95 (R) whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the award passed by the Labour Court in Reference No. 9/95.2. It appears that respondent No. 2 the concerned workman joined the services of the appellant in 1972 and in the personal data form the date of birth of the workman was recorded as 30 years. However, it was alleged that the same was scored out and 35 years was mentioned and again it was made 40 years and taking the age of the workman as 40 years on the date of entry into the service he was made to retire in 1990. The case of the workman was taken up by the Bokaro Mazdoor Samaj and in industrial dispute was raised. After failure of the conciliation, the matter was referred to the Govt. of Bihar and ultimately the following dispute was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication:--'Whether ...
Ravi Rajwar Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-12-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ634
ORDERVishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal has been directed by the appellant named above against the judgment and order dated 11-9-96 passed by Shri Awadesh Kumar Ojha, 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in S.T. No. 117 of 1996 whereby the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the I.P.C. and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo R. I. for four years under Section 399, I.P.C. and three years under Section 402, I.P.C. However, the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case is that the appellant was apprehended by informant P. C. Jha, Officer-in-charge of Kendwadih P.S., at about 22.15 hours on 7-11-85 near the ropeway overbridge at Khaira Balihari Kachi Sadak where he appellant was making preparation along with other co-accused and unknown dacoits for committing dacoity and a knife is stated to have been recovered from the possession of the appellant and a country made pistol was also recovered from co-accused S...
Sumitri Devi and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-11-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1479
ORDER1. This has reference to the note of the Registrar General sitting in Lawazima Board on 9th May, 2002, while dealing with the substitution application filed by the appellants in terms of the Rule 98 of the High Court Rules. On perusal of the file, we find that the appeal was filed in the year 1999 and as per the contents of the substitution application itself (filed on 3rd April, 2002), the appellants admit that the respondent No. 5 had died before the appeal was presented in this Court but that they came to know of his death only 'recently.' 2. The Registrar General in his not dated 9.5.2002 has note taken up of the substitution application for disposal because he felt that the same being time barred should be referred to the Court for appropriate order in terms of Rule 100 of the High Court Rules. 3. Mr. Tiwary, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, submits that Rule 98 of the High Court Rules dealing with such a situation does not enjoin upon the parry applying for subs...
Madhuri Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-11-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1398
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The writ petition has been preferred by widow of late Ramanuj Prasad for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to forthwith pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- and to grant order of appointment in favour of petitioner on compassionate ground.2. The case of petitioner is that her husband Late Ramanuj Prasad was an Advocate's clerk (Munsi) of an Advocate of the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court, having earned of about Rs. 7,000/- per month, On the fateful day i.e. 30.3.2001 when her husband was coming to Hon'ble High Court, he died due to electric shock because of fall of 11000 Volt wire on the road. He was taken to Gandhi Nagar Hospital by the nearby people but he was declared dead. The matter was informed to Kanke Police on the same day when fardbeyan was recorded being Kanke P.S. U.D. case No. 4 of 2001 dated 30.3.2001. The dead-body of the deceased was forwarded to R.M.C.H., Ranchi for Post-Mortem where in-aft...
Binod Kumar Rajak Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-11-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ4410
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal has been directed by the sole appellant named above against the judgment and order dated 17-8-1996 passed in S.T. No. 459/93/TR.No. 62/93 by Shri Alok Kumar Sinha, Sixth Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi whereby the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 366-A of the I.P.C. and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the written report of P.W. 2 Gopal Singh, the informant and father of the alleged victim girl Soni Kaur stated to be 13 or 14 years old lodged before Sukhdeonagar P.S. Ranchi on 9-8-1990 at 10.00 a.m. regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 6-8-1990 at 10.30 a.m. at Piska Chowk near Ratu Road, P.S. Sukhdeonagar, District Ranchi.3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Soni Kaur had gone from his house at 10.30 a.m. on 6-8-1990 for purchasing 'Rakhi' (sacred thread) but she did not return till 11.00 a.m. an...
Syed Tamul HussaIn Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-11-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ4537
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal has been directed by the complainant-appellant against the order dated 31-5-1996 passed by Shri A. Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Seraikella in Complaint Case No. C/1 Case No. 29 of 1994 whereby all the accused respondents have been acquitted.2. The complainant lodged a petition of complaint before the Court of A.C.J.M., Seraikella on 25-6-1994 regarding an occurrence which is said to have taken place on 12-6-94 between 8.00 A.M. and 11.00 A.M. in village Kadamdiha Kharswan, P.S. District Sighbhum West under Sections 323, 447, 427 and 506/34, I.P.C.3. The complainant was examined on S.A. on 27-6-1994 and the learned A.C.J.M. aforesaid took cognizance of the offence under Sections 323 and 427 of the I.P.C. and transferred the case to the Court of Shri N. K. Tiwari, J.M. for trial. All the respondents appeared before the Court and they were bailed out by order dated 16-8-1994. The substance of accusation under Section 251 of the Cr.P.C. was exp...
Pato Devi and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-10-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ4534
Vishnudeo Narayan, J. 1. This appeal has been directed by the appellants named above against the judgment and order dated 29th June, 1996 passed in S.T. No. 24 of 1991 by Sri Gopal Prasad, 6th Addl. Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj whereby all the appellants were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 313 or in the alternative Under Section 315, IPC and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan of P.W. 3 Kanta Devi, the informant, wife of P.W. 8, Jageshwar Sao recorded by the Sadar Police Daltonganj in the Sadar Hospital at Daltonganj on 19-5-1990 at 19.00 hours regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 18-5-19.90 at 6.00 p.m. in Village Sinduria, P.S. Sadar, Daltonganj.3. The prosecution case in brief is that appellant Pato Devi, wife of Rameshwar Sao told the informant that her ox has caused damage to her eucalyptus tree which has been denied by the informant...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›