Jharkhand Court March 2003 Judgments
Bihar Gases Ltd. Through Its Executive (Admn.) Industrial Area Vs. Sta ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-28-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR92(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyam, C.J. 1. The petitioner herein, is an assessee under the Bihar Sales Tax Act. For the assessment year 1991-92, the petitioner was assessed to sales tax under that Act. During the assessment, the petitioner claimed that sum of Rs. 3,62,106.49 p. covered by sale of industrial gas to small scale industrial units for use in manufacture of steel and covered 'G' forms issued by those units, was liable to be excluded while determining the turn over of the assessee. The assessee claimed the benefit of SO No. 791 dated 10.9.1987 which exempted from levy of sales tax or purchase tax, sale of raw materials (whether processed or unprocessed) to the owner of a newly set up industrial unit in large, medium and tiny sector which is approved and registered by the Industrial Department of the Government of Bihar or a competent authority. According to the assessee, the ethane gas or the industrial gas supplied by it to such small scale units were used by such units in the process of...
Tag this Judgment!Nandu Hembram and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-28-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR122(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants named above against the impugned judgment and order dated 26.5.2000 passed by Shri S.H. Kazmi, 3rd Additional Sessions Judge. East Singhbhum Jamshedpur in S.T. No. 373 of 1997 whereby and where under they were found guilty for the offence punishable under 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. However, no separate sentence was awarded to them for the offence punishable under Sections 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 8) of PW 14, Kundi Hembram widow of Kanhai Lal Hembram, the deceased of this case recorded by PW 16 ASI, G.M. Ansari of Shyam Sun-darpur PS in the paddy field of Zamadar Hansda in village Bartaulia, PS Chakulia (Shyam Sundarpur), Ghatshila, East Singhbhum at 10.15 hours on 14.10.1996 regarding ...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Rekha Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-28-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR681(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard. Insurance Company has filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 19.6.2002, passed by Motor Vehicles Claim Tribunal, Bokaro, in Title M.V. Case No. 51 of 1998, whereby insurer was directed to indemnify owner's liability to pay compensation of Rs. 2,74,000/-. On 28.9.1998 the truck (BR-17-0431) loaded with coils developed a snag on the way. The owner of the truck asked the driver to change its wheel with the help of jack. The jack was not working properly. In the meantime, another truck (BEV-8058) came there and on request its driver, Ashok Kumar Sah came down to assist in changing the defective wheel. While doing so unfortunately the said truck turned turtle and fell down crushing the leg and waist of Ashok Kumar Sah. He was taken to hospital, where he was declared dead.2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since accident did not take place due to rash and negligent driving o...
Tag this Judgment!Baliram Ojha Vs. State of Bihar Through the Secretory-cum-commissioner ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-28-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR344(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J. 1. Heard Mr. V. Shiv-nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R R. Mishra, G.P. II for the respondents.2. Mr. V. Shivnath, learned counsel for the Petitioner has frankly submitted that he is praying for quashing of Annexures 13, 15 and 18 appended to the Writ Application. By Annexure-13, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests reverted the Petitioner from the post of Forester to his original post, i.e. to the post of Forest Guard by his office order No 256 dated 03.12.1996 on the ground that he did not possess the necessary qualification that were necessary for such promotion. By Annexure-15, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests did not decide the matter in relation to seniority/promotion and instead, directed that the matter should await the decision of the State Government. By Annexure-18, the New Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, made non effective the order passed by his predecessor in office i.e. Annexure-16 (Memo No. 1911 dated 30.04.1997...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Lukman Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-28-2003
Reported in: II(2003)DMC779
ORDERD.N. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') for quashing the order dated 14.2.2002 whereby the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar allowed Criminal Rev ision No. 35-A of 1998, setting aside the order dated 25.3.1998 passed by Sri J.P.N. Pandey, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Madhupur at Deoghar in Criminal Case No. 60 of 1006/T.R. No. 675 of 1998.2. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready to keep the wife/opposite party No. 2 with all dignity and he has never raised question as to the unchastity of opposite party No. 2. It is further submitted that the learned Court below committed error in allowing the revision application but the learned Trial Court rightly passed the order dismissing the clalm of the petitioner when he is ready to keep his wife gracefully but the opposite party No. 2/wife does not want to reside ...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Iron of Steel Company Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar54; [2003(2)JCR483(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Petitioner filed the instant writ application seeking issuance of an appropriate writ declaring that the respondents Bihar State Electricity Boardis not entitled to demand any bank commission/bank collection charges from the petitioner with respect to its electrical connection because payment made by the pclitioner with respect to the said electrical connection by cheques drawn in favour of the Board at the bank situated in the headquarter of the office of the Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Dhanbad and further for a direction upon the respondents Board to calculate and work out such bank collection charges illegally realized from the petitioner and refund/adjust the same which is sought to be realized by the Board from the petitioner under the head of delayed payment of energy bills.2. Petitioner is having one of its colliery at Chasnala in the District of Dhanbad and it was having High Tension Electrical Connection. The petitioner used t...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Imtiyaz Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: II(2003)DMC186; [2003(2)JCR499(Jhr)]
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad 1. This criminal revision is directed against the, order dated 14.8.2002 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranch! in connection with Maintenance Case No. 64 of 1998, whereby and whereunder the learned Court passed the order allowing maintenance of Rs. 1000/- to be paid to the Opposite party-Momina Khatoon under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The short facts giving rise to this application that the Opposite party No. 2 filed a petition under Section 125 Cr. P,C. claiming therein that the Opposite party No. 2 and petitioner got married in November 1984 at village Simaliya, PS-Ratu, District-Ranchi and they started residing together. Two children also born out of their wedlock. Petitioner said to have contracted second marriage with one Mairoon in November, 1998 and at that time the petitioner, assured the Opposite party No. 2 that he would keep them separately and take all care of them, but after his second marriage the petitioner cha...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Behari Modi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR61(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J. 1. Heard Mr. V. Shivnath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rupesh Singh, J.C. to S.C.I. for the State- Respondents.2. The petitioner has made a prayer that his case for promotion to the super time scale be considered with effect from 01.03.1989, as other persons who are junior to him have been given the said promotion from the said date. The petitioner has also prayed for consequential benefits relating to fixation of his salary etc. on the basis of grant of the aforementioned promotion to the super time scale. The petitioner further prays that consequential calculations be also directed to be made in relation to his post retrial benefits. The petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk on 23.06.1954 and was subsequently promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk with effect from 19.12.1959. He passed the Accounts Examination on 30.06.1960. While he was posted as an Accountant at Sub-Treasury at Chatra, he was proceeded against for misconduct and was...
Tag this Judgment!Chamari Viswakarma Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR19(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. Heard both sides.The petitioner was granted sanctioned load of 15 H.P. the petitioner was detected to have a connected load of 31.5 H.P. thus, thereafter the petitioner supply of electric-energy was disconnected.2. The contention of the petitioner is that the electricity supply of the petitioner was disconnected without any show cause and another contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner runs a repairing shop therefore, in his premises several equipments were found lying for repairs and the inspection team presumed that those equipments are beingused in the premises of the petitioner and, therefore, misconstrued in enhancing the power load.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed representations by different annexures before the authorities denying the allegation made in the inspection report. It appears that thereafter, by Annexure-5 the Chief Engineer asked the Electrical Executive Eng...
Tag this Judgment!Pratima Goel Vs. Yashwant Sinha
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: 2003(51)BLJR915; [2003(3)JCR725(Jhr)]
Deoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This election petition has been field for declaration that the election of Shri Yashwant Sinha to 13th Lok Sabha from 48 Hazaribagh Parliamentary Constituency in the general election 1999 be declared to be void.2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:--The President of India called upon the electors of the 48 Hazaribagh Parliamentary Constituency to elect one member to the Lok in its 1999 General Election for constituting 13th Lock Sabha. The Collector of Hazaribagh district was appointed as Returning Officer and the following dates were prescribed by the Election Commission of India for holding the aforesaid election:-- (a) Date for filing nomination: Between 21-8-1999 to 28-8-1999. (b) Date of scrutiny of nomination: 30-8-1999. (c) Date for withdrawal, if any, of nomination: 1-9-1999. (d) Date of polling if necessary: 18-9-1999. (e) Date for counting of votes: 6-10-1999 (f) Date of declaration of result: 7-10-1999.3. The petitioner, respondent and some o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »