Jharkhand Court November 2003 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.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ravi Prasad
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR66; [2003(4)JCR609(Jhr)]
Gurusharan Sharma, J. 1. This revision has been filed under Section 14 (8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (thereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') wherein the defendant has challenged the judgment and deeree dated 22.7.2002, passed by the First Subordinate Judge, Ranchi, in Eviction Title Suit No. 6 of 2000, directing the tenant to hand over vacant possession of the suit premises to the landlord.2. The Branch Officer of the United India Insurance Company Limited was located in the ground floor of the building situated over plot Nos. 211/C/1, C/11, 214, 13/1, 214, B/2. 213 (3), appertaining to Khata No. 11 at Doranda of Ranchi town, bearing Municipal Holding No. 32, having an area measuring more or less 1500 sq. ft.3. The owner of the aforesaid premises let it out to the defendant at a monthly rental of Rs. 5451/- for a fixed period of five years, commencing from 1.6.1995 and ending on 31.5.2000 by virtue of a registered deed of lease. The tenan...
Jai Gopal Rai Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR97(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order of his transfer from the post of Charge Office, Settlement Office Hazaribagh to the post of Deputy Secretary, Energy Department, Ranchi on the ground of mala fide. It was specifically alleged that the transfer order was issued on the recommendation of Shri Madhu Singh, Minister, Revenue and Land Reforms, Jharkhand. This Court on 10.7.2003 passed the following order :'According to petitioner he is to superannuate from service within one year i.e. on 31st January, 2004. He has also alleged the order of transfer punitive referring to the letter of the Minister dated 10th April, 2003 (Annexure-8).From the aforesaid letter dated 10th April, 2003 it appears that there are certain allegation levelled against the petitioner in respect to which the Chief Minister has ordered to hold enquiry and to take further action.The Counsel for the State is allowed four weeks' time to obtain instructions a...
Md. Nasim Khan Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Limited
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR109(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard both sides.The dispute relates to preparation of record of rights holding that the land in question vests in the Central Government under the Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, 1973. The appellate authority confirmed the order of the revisional authority recording the respondent herein in the record of rights as being in possession. The learned Single Judge refused to interfere with the order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, taking the view that it will be proper for the appellant to institute a suit in the Civil Court in terms of Section 87 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). This decision is challenged in this appeal.2. Mr. P.K. Prasad, counsel for the appellant submitted that the order was passed by the revisional authority without hearing the appellant and on that ground alone, the appellate authority ought to have set aside the order of the revisional authority. Alternatively, he submitted that the appellant was en...
Braj Mohan Prasad Singh Vs. Bihar State Housing Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR56(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. These two writ petitions are taken up together and being disposed of by this common judgment, as common questions are involved in these cases.2. The only question is as to whether the petitioners, who have been allotted staff quarters, are centitled to receive the House Rent Allowance (H.R.A. for short) or not.3. Admittedly, the petitioners were allotted the premises as 'staff quarters' on a nominal rent. The standard rent was much higher i.e. about 7 times more than the rent to be paid for occupying such staff quarters.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on several documents and submitted that as per the relevant rules they are also entitled to receive the H.R.A. But I find on going through those documents that those relate to the 'rental premises'. The nominal amount charged against occupation of a staff quarter is also called 'rent'. In that context, the documents relied on by the petitioners show that those rental premises are not the Government premise...
Guru Pada Ghosh Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Industrial Tribun ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR217]; [2004(1)JCR66(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the award dated 31.3.1993, passed in Reference Case No. 41 of 1988 by the Presiding Officer, Central Government, Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Dhanbad. The Tribunal heard four Reference Cases, including Reference Case No. 41 of 1988, or the preliminary point of maintainability and held that they are not maintainable in view of the Coal Mines Nationalization Law (Amendment) Act, 1986 (Amendment Act' for Short).2. The petitioner, an employee of Loyabad colliery, after due enquiry was dismissed on 6.4.1968 on the charge of defalcation of money, belonging to the Cooperative Stores of the Colliery. Under the Coal Mines Nationalization Act, 1973 ('Nationalization Act' for short), the Colliery was nationalized. It appears that a criminal case was also instituted against the petitioner regarding the said defalcation in which he was acquitted by judgment-dated 9.10.1980. The petitioner claims that he made a representation for his ...
Chandrika Singh Vs. Employers in Relation to the Management of Chhotan ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR539(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The writ-petitioner workman has challenged the award dated 25.01.1997 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi in Reference Case No. 10 of 1998, whereby the Labour Court has field that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief whatsoever claimed after holding that the petitioner voluntarily left the service without information after 28.08.1986 resulting in his termination from service by strucking off his name from the roll of the Company and it was not a case of victimisation.The reference before the Labour Court was as under :--'Whether the termination of Sri Chandrika Singh workman of M/s. Chhotanagpur Rope Works Mahilong, Ranchi is proper and justified? If not whether he is entitled to reinstatement or/and any other relief?'2. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following points were formulated by the Labour Court for determination :--'(i) Whether service of the concerned workman was terminated or he abandoned the service himself...
Pawan Enterprises Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-10-2003
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR652(Jhr)]
1. As prayed for the counsel for the appellant is permitted to make amendment in the cause title of the appeal and mention 'Jharkhand' in place of 'Bihar' in the name of the Electricity Board, just now.2. This appeal has been filed by the consumer against the order dated 24.1.2001, passed by the learned single Judge, in CWJC No. 118 of 2001, whereby the decision dated 19.10.2000 (Annexure 14) of the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Jamshedpur Area Electricity Board, Jamshedpur, was not interfered with and the writ-application was dismissed.3. Admittedly, the appellant is LTIS consumer of the Electricity Board and situated at, Adityapur Industrial Area, Jamshedpur. In the year 1991, the appellant took electrical connection for contract load of 25 HP which was connected with 63 KVA transformer, which was subsequently enhanced to 50 HP.4. In the year 1995, the appellant desired to expand its activities and applied for further expansion of contract load from 50 HP to 70 HP which was san...
Accropoly Glass Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Bo ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar73; [2003(4)JCR604(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the bill dated 1.8.2003 issued by the respondent Jharkhand State Electricity Board demanding a sum of Rs. 9,20,517/- being the Annual Minimum Guarantee (A.M.G.) charges for one year notice period subsequent to disconnection of the electrical line of the petitioner on 30.11.2000.2. Petitioner's case is that in the year 1990, petitioner became a H.T. consumer for supply of electricity in its plant having contract demand of 80 KVA. Subsequently, in 1998 the connected load of the petitioner was enhanced from 80 KVA to 180 KVA vide H.T. Agreement dated 10.6.1998. On 5.3.1999 the petitioner served a notice upon the respondent-Board under clause 9 (a) of the Agreement and the said notice was received on 6.3.1999 . After expiry of 12 months from 5.3.2000, the Agreement alleged to have been automatically stood terminated but the electrical connection of the petitioner was not disconnected. The petitioner therefore sent a letter dated 28.1...
Shyama Pada Soren and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2003
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR35(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellants above named has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 25.7.1995 passed in Sessions Trial Nos. 50 of 1992/ 29 of 1995 by -Shri D.D. Guru, Assistant Sessions Judge, Ghatshila, East Singhbhum where and whereunder appellant Shyama Pada Soren was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and appellant Ram Chandra Hansda was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376/34 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,500/- and in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the first information report (Ext...
Mihir Kumar Mahto @ Budhai Mahto and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jhar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2003
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR51(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellants above named has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 28.8.1995 passed in Sessions Trial Nos. 174 of 1986/ 70 of 1995 by Shri D.D. Guru, Assistant Sessions Judge, Ghatshila, East Singhbhum whereby and whereunder both the appellants were guilty for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the first information report (Ext. 5) lodged by PW 6 Doman Patar, the informant, against unknown dacoits before Chakulia Police Station on 9.4.1984 at 11.30 hours regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place in the night between 8th and 9th of April, 1984 in his house situate at Village Aamdangara, Tola Dumridih, PS Chakulia, East Singhbhum.3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant awoke in the night of the occurrence after ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »