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.
Prakash Iron and Steel Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-02-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar1; [2003(3)JCR299(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.3.2002 passed by respondent No. 2, General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Dumka Area Electricity Board, Dumka, whereby the claim of the petitioner under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement has been disallowed and fresh bill has been raised,2. The short question that falls for consideration is as to whether respondent No. 2 was justified in disallowing the claim for the period when the factory was closed due to labour unrest and further petitioner is entitled to remission for non-supply of energy due to interruption below 30 minutes.3. Petitioner factory is engaged in Re-rollers, Fabricators and Mechanical Engineers. It is High-tension consumer having contract demand of 225 KVA and agreement to this effect was entered into between the petitioner and the then Bihar State Electricity Board. It is contended that due to labour unrest and strike, the factory was dosed from 19.10.2000 to 8.12.2000, as a r...
Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-02-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR456(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is by the petitioner in CWJC Nor 248/2000 (R). In that writ petition, the petitioner-appellant, challenged the Circular dated 10.11.1999, marked Annexure-2 and a supplementary bill for fuel surcharge dated 24.11.1999 marked Annexure-3 and other similar bills issued relating to the various units of the petitioner. The learned Single Judge found that the questions sought to be raised related to the year 1998-99 which is covered by the decision of the Division Bench in CWJC No. 5542 of 1999 and connected cases. The learned Judge, therefore, directed the Electricity Board to issue fresh bills in terms of the direction issued in CWJC No. 5542 of 1999, if such fresh bills have not been issued already pursuant to the said direction.2. This appeal is filed by the appellant with a submission that the judgment in CWJC No. 5542 of 1999 does not fully cover the situation.3. Counsel for the Electricity Board submitted that the bills are sought to be raised in view of the directi...
Arbind Kumar Ganeriwala Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-02-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1041
ORDERLakshman Uraon, J.1. Petitioner in this writ petition has assailed the order dated 18-12-1998, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro, as well as the order dated 20-5-1998, passed by the learned trial Court, Chas, rejecting the application of the petitioner for discharging him and also for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Galidih P.S. Case No. 77 of 1987 (G.R. No. 8360 of 1997), registered under Sections 420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of Sri. O. P. Srivastava, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chas.2. The prosecution case, as mentioned in the First Information Report, is that S. N. Agrawala, proprietor of Chandan Agency, opened current account with the United Bank of India and opposite party No. 2 R. D. Yadav (informant) was the Bank Manager of the United Bank of India, Bokaro Industrial Estate Branch, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro. It is alleged that S. N. Agrawala on behalf of Chandan Agency took loan of Rs. 1,10...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›