Jharkhand Court July 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.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Chand Rani and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: III(2004)ACC748; [2004(3)JCR258(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard both sides.2. This appeal is by the Insurance Company (Respondent No. 2) before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a claim for compensation. The Tribunal held that the parents of the deceased was entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-. After marking the policy of insurance as Ext. A, the Tribunal held that the Insurance Company was liable to pay the entire amount.3. The Insurance Company appealed. It contended before the learned single Judge that its liability was limited to the statutory minimum under Section 95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. It was contended that it was a passenger bus, which had a capacity to carry fifty passengers and the premium to cover the risk was at the rate of Rs. 12/- per head and that indicated that it was merely a statutory policy and the liability was not unlimited. It was, therefore, submitted that the entire amount was not liable to be paid by the Insurance Company. This contention was met on behalf of the claimants by submit...
Amar Nath Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR342(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1.This application has been preferred by petitioner for direction on the respondents to grant him first time bound promotion w.e.f. 1972, the year he completed ten years of service and to confirm the second time bound promotion granted to him since 1986 on completion of 25 years of service treating his service continuous since 1961.Further prayer has been made to quash the office order No. 322, dated 3rd September, 1996 and letter No. 2/E/112/Stha, dated 9th February, 1999 issued by the Chief Inspector of Factories, Ranchi whereby and where under the second time bound promotion earlier granted to him has been cancelled and it has been ordered to recover the excess amount of Rs. 50,804.55 paise from his retrial benefits.2. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner, who was appointed as Lower Division Assistant in the office of Chief Inspector of Factories, Ranchi, was transferred against a post of Computer (Sanganak) having higher scale of Rs. 240-396/-, as...
Umesh Kumar Singh Alias Umesh Singh Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1504
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 26-2-1997 passed by the Additional Judicial Commissioner, Lohardaga in S.T. No. 344 of 1995/75 of 1996 whereby the learned trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years.2. The prosecution case in short is that in the night of 6/7-12-1994 at about 11 p.m. when the informant along with Lalit Oraon and Flaster Topno, were sleeping in the Khalihan. 13 unknown persons came there variously armed and told them they were members of Jan Mukti Morcha and they proposed to hold a meeting in the village. They demanded food from the villagers and thereafter started eating the food materials available in the house of Chengra Munda. The miscreants told them that they were not criminals but they were the protectors of forests and they began to demand money from the villagers. On refusal they took away some sarees fro...
Bihar State Housing Board and anr. Vs. Services Housing Co-operative S ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2003
Reported in: (2003)3BOMLR1916; [2003(3)JCR285(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. Respondents 1 and 2 in CWJC No. 2352 of 1993 filed in the Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi are the appellants In this appeal. The appellant, in effect, is the Bihar State Housing Board governed by the Bihar State Housing Board Act, 1982. -2. The writ petitioner (respondent No. 1 herein) is a Society registered under the Bihar and Orissa Co-operative Societies Act. It is a co-operative society of the Government employees. The Society sought allotment of land from the Government to meet its object of providing land for construction of houses to the employees of the Government of Bihar, who became its members. It was decided by the Government to allot 155 acres of land to the Society as can be seen from the proposal dated 19.12.1964. But it is seen that on the basis of the title of the State, only an extent of 152.36 acres was available for being granted to the Society. Therefore, under an agreement for sale dated 30.1.1969 (An-nexure 3 in the counter af...
Jharu Napit Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR424(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. Anjani Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rupesh Kumar Singh, learned J.C. to the Standing Counsel No. 1 for the State-Recpondents.2. This is a transferred matter from Patna and it appears that the private respondent No. 5 against whom the petitioner has made serious allegations had already appeared at Patna before the Patna High Court through his advocate and he has also filed a counter affidavit.3. The only documents on which the petitioner relies upon are rent receipts and from perusal thereof it appears that the petitioner's father paid rent to the State of Bihar.4. The case of the Petitioner is that, his father Gopal Napit was given/settled two decimals of land-on Plot No. 1469, JB No. 24/2883-Ja within Mouza Hirna by the then Ghatwal of the Rohini Estate in the year 1950. Consequently the Petitioner's father built a 'kuchcha' house in the year 1950 and started living on that plot and also started his family business. According to the...
Ramakant Sharma Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2003
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR178b(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. It appears that a departmental proceeding has been initiated against petitioner and separate criminal case. In the case of M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd., reported in 1999 (3) SCC 679, the Supreme Court held as follows :--The conclusions which are deducible from various decisions of this Court referred to above are.(i) Departmental proceedings and proceedings in a criminal case can proceed simultaneously as there is no bar in their being conducted simultaneously, though separately.(ii) If the departmental proceedings and the criminal case are based on identical and similar set of facts and the charge in the criminal case against the delinquent employee is of a grave nature which involves complicated questions of law and fact, it would be desirable to stay the departmental proceedings till the conclusion of the criminal case.(iii) Whether the nature of charge in a criminal case is grave and whether complicated questions of fact and law are involve...
Golo Mandla Ram Rao and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1738
Vishnudeo Narayan, J. 1. All the appellants named above have preferred these appeals against the impugned judgment and order dated 5-2-2001 to 8-2-2001 respectively passed in Sessions Trial No. 817 of 1998 by Sri Radha Krishna, 2nd Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi whereby and whereunder appellant Golo Mandla Rama Rao, Ranjit Bahadur Singh alias Munna Singh and Manoj Kumar were found guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offences under Sections 489A and 489B IPC each and R. I. for seven years for the offence under Section 489C I.P.C. However, no separate sentence was imposed for the offence under Section 120B IPC A fine of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed against each of them under each count and in default thereof to undergo imprisonment for one month. 'Appellant Uma Shankar Singh was found guilty for the offence under Sections 489A, 489D, 489C and 120B of the...
Doctor Mondal Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR411(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard the parties. 2. This writ application is directed against the order dated 20.2.2002/ 15.3.2002 passed by respondent No. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Dumka directing the petitioner to deposit the penalty for illegal extraction of stone after the cancellation of the lease from the lease hold area and issued demand notice of Rs. 5,28,765/-. 3. The admitted facts which emergefrom the affidavits filed by the parties arethat petitioner was granted mining lease inrespect of 1.25 acres of land bearing Dag No.223 in Mouza Chirapather P.S. Shikariparain the district of Dumka for a period of fiveyears. In 2000 by letter dated 21.7.2000demand of Rs. 38,213.15 was issuedagainst the petitioner and on default of payment the lease was terminated for the restperiod from 23.8.2000. It is also admitted factthat after termination of lease petitionerdeposited the aforesaid amount on differentdated i.e. Rs. 10,000/- on 29.8.2000, Rs.15,000/- on 7.9.2000 and Rs. 13,500/- on20.10.2000....
Ugendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR448(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the office order dated 8.6.2002, whereby the services of the petitioner was terminated by the respondents/Ranchi University and further for a direction to the University to allow the petitioner to join the service. 3. Petitioner was appointed in the year 1979 as Air Conditioning mechanic. Petitioner's case is that in 1984 he fell sick and went to his native place for taking rest as per the advice of the doctor. In 1985, he sent application for leave. It is stated by him that when he recovered from his ailment, his wife fell ill and therefore, he could not joint his duty. It is only in 2001, petitioner said to have come to Ranchi and filed application requesting the University to allow him to join Respondent-University however, terminated the services of the petitioner.4. Respondents case in the counter affidavit is that when petitioner became absent from his duty, a show cause not...
Bijay Kumar Sharma and ors. Vs. Ranchi University and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR127(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. N.N. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. In this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the office order of the Ranchi University issued under Memo No. B/968-971, dated 9.3.1995 by the Registrar of the said University as contained at Annexure-7 whereby and whereunder the scale of the petitioners which they were drawing for the last so many months was reduced and down graded without giving any opportunity of hearing and without any notice. The petitioners have further prayed that the respondents be directed to make payment of the revised scale of pay to which the petitioners were entitled and which they were drawing prior to passing of the impugned office order. The petitioners have also made a prayer for payment of arrears of the difference of salary which was stopped all of a sudden from November, 1994 together with interest.3. The case of the petitioners...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »