Jharkhand Court September 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 Company Ltd. Vs. Usha Kiran Sharma and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR291(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Defect in the certified copy of award as pointed out by stamp report dated 12.6.2003 is ignored for the present. The Appeal has been filed in time.2. Heard. The appeal has been filed by the insurer against the judgment and award dated 7.2.2003, passed in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 116 of 2001, whereby the appellant has been directed to indemnify the liability of the owner of the auto-rickshaw, BR-17P-3424, the respondent No. 5 and pay the compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 7,64,000/- with interest (r) 9% per annum from the date of accident till payment to the respondents 1 to 4.3. The counsel for the appellant submitted that driver of the offending vehicle at the time of accident was not displaying the badge, as required under Rule 18(2) of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Rules 1992 and as such term of the insurance policy was violated and the insurer was not responsible to indemnify the owner's liability and therefore, on the ratio of the decision of Apex Court in New India Insurance ...
Ganesh Prasad Tiwary, Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: I(2004)BC622; [2003(4)JCR392(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. In these oases, as common question involved, they were heard together and are being disposed of at this stage, as agreed by the parties, by a common order. 2. A Short Notice Inviting Tender No. 2/02-03 was published calling for applications to submit tender papers with regard to different works.3. Petitioners and some others submitted tender papers for one or other works in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organisation (REO for short), Works Division, Sahebganj.4. The documents relating to the tender after assessment were forwarded to the Office of the Chief Engineer, REO, Ranchi. But subsequently, instead of allotting any work, a fresh Short Notice Inviting Tender No. 1/03-04 was issued and published in newspaper on 8th July, 2003 with respect to the same work.5. The petitioners who claimed to have quoted the same rate for the work, in question, and claimed to be the lowest tenderer, have challenged the fresh Short Notice Inviting T...
Pitambar Singh Manki @ Pitambar Singh and anr. Vs. Makar Singh and ors ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR601(Jhr)]
ORDERGurusharan Sharma, J.1. Heard. In Title Partition Suit No. 38 of 2001, the summons were served on the defendants 1 and 2 and thereafter both of them appeared together in the suit on 30.8.2002 and filed a petition for granting time to file written statement, which was allowed and they were permitted to file written statement by 9.9.2002. As no written statement was filed, on 13.12.2002 the plaintiffs filed a petition for proceeding the suit under Order VIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was directed to be put up for hearing on 10.1.2003 and the defendants 1 and 2 were given one more indulgence to file written statement in the meantime. Again on 10.1.2003 the defendants 1 and 2 filed petition for granting further time to file written statement, which was kept on record, however, on 23.1.2003 the defendants 1 and 2 were debarred to file written statement under proviso to Order VIII, Rule 1 of the Code. The defendants I and 2 failed to file written statement maximum wi...
Ram Prasad Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR389(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. Petitioner seeks direction upon the respondents to grant benefit of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court dated 9.1.1992 in SLP (C) No. 910207 of 1990.3. The admitted facts of the case is that petitioner was appointed by the District Malaria Officer, Giridih on the post of Field Worker. In 1988 petitioner's appointment was cancelled alongwith other persons. After about two years i.e., in 1990 petitioner challenged the order of termination by filing CWJC No. 2281 of 1990(R). The writ petition was dismissed on 28.11.1990 by passing the following order :--'In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing the order dated 16.8.1988 passed by the respondent No. 2 terminating the service of the petitioner. From a perusal of the impugned order as contained in Annexure-5 to the writ application, it appears that the respondent No. 2 came to the conclusion that the appointment of the petitioner was i...
Naresh Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar63; [2003(4)JCR386(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The instant application has been filed by the Bihar School Examination Board who is respondent in CWJC No. 1805 of 2000(R) for modification of the order dated 13.2.2002 passed by this Court in the aforementioned writ petition.2. The aforesaid writ petition CWJC No. 1805/2000 was filed by one Naresh Prasad Singh (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) seeking writ of mandamus directing the respondent-Board to issue Matriculation Certificate of his son namely, Barun Kumar Singh who had appeared in 1997 examination conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board.3. Petitioner's case is that his son was a regular student of Saraswati Vidya Mandir High School, Dhurwa, Ranchi and his name was registered in the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna (in short the Board). Petitioner's son appeared in the examination in the year 1997 in all the papers but his name was recorded as absent in all the papers. However, marks-sheet was issued to him declaring him pass with fi...
Rajeev Kumar Sinha Vs. Jharkhand Intermediate Education Council and or ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR78(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate direction upon the respondents to issue mark sheet of the petitioner who appeared in Intermediate Examination, 2003.3. The facts of the case, in nut shell, are that the petitioner appeared in the Intermediate Examination, 2001 and he was declared passed in second division. A mark sheet to that effect was also issued. It is stated' that the petitioner being not satisfied with the mark sheet secured by him, made an application for scrutiny of the answer papers. However, the petitioner again decided to appear in the same Intermediate Examination in 2003 and, accordingly, he submitted necessary papers and deposited requisite fee in the concerned school. The Intermediate Council issued admit card allowing him to appear in the Intermediate Examination. 2003. The petitioner appeared in the examination and his result was published and a cross list, was issued wherein the petition...
Sartaj Blood Bank Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the Health Secretar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR296(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application was preferred by the petitioner against the letter dated 13th May, 2003 issued by the Drug Controller General of India, New Delhi, whereby and whereunder, all the State Drug Control Authorities were directed not to accept or process any fresh application of 'Stand Alone Blood Bank' in private sector in view of the proposed amendment of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules.2. The case was taken up on 28th August, 2003, when the Court noticed that there was nothing on the record to suggest any amendment of law and observed that the authorities cannot await any amendment of law for the purpose of determination of question whether permission to be granted to open a 'Stand Alone Blood Bank' in the private sector or not.3. The Central Drug Inspector, Central Drugs Control Organisation, Eastern Zone. Kolkata was directed to appear before the Court and file affidavit to a assist in the matter. The petitioner was also asked to file an affidavit giving deta...
Manoj Prasad Chaudhary Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR72(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard counsel for the appellant and Mr. Modi, counsel for the respondents.2. The appellant was a licensee of a fair price shop. His shop was inspected. It was found that his books of account were not up-to-date. It was also found that there was shortage in sugar stock in the shop premises. Some of the customers linked to that shop also complained that the appellant was over charging. The authority concerned, therefore, issued a notice to the appellant to show cause why his licence should not be cancelled for violation of the conditions of the licence. The appellant submitted an explanation. The licensing authority found that the facts established, clearly showed that the conditions of the licence were violated. Thus he cancelled the licence.3. The appellant filed an appeal. The appellate authority reconsidered the question arising for decision. The appellate authority found that the books of accounts were not properly maintained and there was shortage in sugar stock in the prem...
Anup Kumar Verma Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1712; I(2004)DMC489; [2003(4)JCR473(Jhr)]
Vishundeo Narayan, J. 1. The appellant named above has preferred this appeal against the impugned judgment and order dated 47.5.2001 and 19.5.2001 respectively passed in Sessions Trial No. 589 of 1998 by Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Srivastava, 4th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and three years for the offence under Section 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code respectively. However both the sentences were ordered to rum concurrently.2. The prosecution case arisen on the basis of the written report (Ext. 4) of SI Sanjay Kumar of Lower Bazar P.S. Ranchi, the informant, handed over to PW 10 Abhay Kumar Jha, the IO of this case at the place of occurrence on 21.4.1998 at 11.30 hours regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on that very day at 10.30 hours...
Kali Agro Chemicals Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR734(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and GP-III for the respondents.2. The petitioner claimed the benefit of S.O. 479 issued under the Industrial Policy, 1995 as modified by S.O. 58. The question that arose was whether the petitioner was qualified for the benefit conferred by the said Order. The matter had earlier come to this Court in WP(T) No. 441 of 2002 and this Court by way of an interim direction, directed the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to take a decision on the claim. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes passed an order, more or less remanding the proceeding to the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes to dispose of the matter, in accordance with law. Some of the arguments raised, in our view, were answered while making the remand. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of by this Court in the light of the order passed by Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.3. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and order Annexure 4, forwarding the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »