Jharkhand Court November 2004 Judgments
Devanti Devi Vs. Rupan Tanty and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Jhar49; 2005(1)BLJR351; [2005(1)JCR158(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7.2.2003 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad in Title Matrimonial Suit No. 22 of 2001, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant for a decree of judicial separation under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been dismissed on contest.2. The plaintiff-appellant, who is the wife, filed the aforementioned suit for a decree of judicial separation on the ground, inter alia, that about 22 years back she was married with respondent No. 1 and were blessed with two female children and both the appellant and respondent No. 1 live together at their matrimonial home. About seven years back, the respondent No, 1 married with another lady, the respondent No. 2 and the latter started living with her children. The plaintiffs further case was that the matrimonial house became a curse for her because of starting of series of quarrel, assault and torture and finally she was ousted from the matrimonial house.3. The sui...
Tag this Judgment!Surendra Murmu Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR95; [2005(1)JCR233(Jhr)]
N.N. Tiwari, J.1. The appellant was put on trial for the murder of the informant's father Mangal Soren and was found guilty for the offence under Sections 302 & 324, IPC. He has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302, IPC and RI for two years under Section 324, IPC.2. Briefly stated, prosecution case is that at about 3-4.5.1998 at village Kokrad, P.S.-Tundi, District-Dhanbad the informant's marriage was being solemnized in the night. The accused-appellant Surendra Murmu, under influence of intoxication, came and started dancing and uttering filthy languages. The persons who were present over there objected to the same and drove him out from the place. The appellant threatened the informant's father and others who were present there with dire consequences. It is alleged that at about 1 O'Clock in the night when the informant's father Mangal Soren was going out for washing his feet and as soon as he stepped out of the door, he suddenly cried that ...
Tag this Judgment!iris Electronics (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand Through the ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR581; [2005(1)JCR130(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. The principal question which falls for consideration in both of the writ applications is no longer res Integra. As also admitted at the Bar, the instant cases are covered by the decision of the Apex Court rendered in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ranchi and Ors. v. M/s. Swarn Rekha Cokes and Coals Pvt. Ltd. & Ors, reported in 2004 (3) PLJR 146.2. In writ application WP (T) No. 31342/2001, the petitioner has prayed :-(i) For a declaration that the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and the relevant rules framed therein and the notification issued in exercise of powers under the Act will continue to operate in the State of Jharkhand till any amendment is made under the provisions of Section 84 of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000.(ii) For a declaration that the benefit conferred to the industries by virtue of the Industrial Policy Resolution, 1995 and the notification issued pursuant to the Industrial Policy Resolution to carry out the objects of the said resolution will...
Tag this Judgment!Jharkhand (Bihar) State Electricity Board and ors. Vs. State of Jharkh ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR241(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal, at the instance of the appellants, is directed against the judgment dated 29.6.2000 and decree dated 7.7.2000 passed in Money Suit No. 108/27 of 1987-88, whereby and whereunder the learned Subordinate Judge III. Ranchi, decreed the suit.2. The case of the plaintiff in brief is that the plaintiff Usha Martin Udyog Ltd, registered under the Companies Act, at Tanti Silway. P.S. Tanti Silway, District. Ranchi, runs its business. Previously Usha Martin Udyog Ltd. was known as Usha Martin Black Ltd, which after conversion is known as Usha Martin Udyog Ltd. The plaintiff entered into an agreement in 1961 for taking high tension electric energy. According to the agreement, plaintiff consumed electricity and installed separate meters for factories as well as for domestic purposes and plaintiff sent separate monthly consumption report to the defendants and defendants in turn sent bill on the basis of electrical consumption. As soon as defendants sent bills,...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Lal Rai Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board Through Its Chairm ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR432(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard the parties.2. In view of the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary, at this stage, to ask the respondents to file any affidavit.3. It is indeed painful and shocking to this Court to note that although this petitioner superannuated on 31.3.2004 and although he filed representations before the concerned authorities, yet the respondents have not taken care to release the entire post retiral dues, such as the ones enumerated/stated in paragraph of the writ petition.4. Let it be recorded that pension is no longer a bounty, but it is a right. In that view of the matter, this Court grants one opportunity to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to immediately and forthwith attend to the case of the petitioner and deal with the same and take a final decision in accordance with law. To that extent therefore, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with a copy of this order before the respondent No. 2,...
Tag this Judgment!Dhaneshwar Kumbhakar Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2312; [2005(1)JCR119(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Appellant has filed this application under Section 389(1) and (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for suspending the order of conviction during the pendency of appeal.2. The appellant was apprehended by the CBI Officers in a trap, demanding and accepting illegal gratification amounting to Rs. 200/-. He has been found guilty and has been convicted for the offence under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and has been sentenced by the trial Court. The said judgment is challenged in the present appeal. This appeal was admitted and the provisional bail granted to the appellant by the trial Court was confirmed on 20.2.2004.3. The appellant now prays for suspending the order of conviction. It is stated that the appellant, during the pendency of this appeal, had received memorandum issued by the concerned department whereby he was asked to make representation on the major penalty proposed to be imposed on him i...
Tag this Judgment!Giriraj Prasad Agrawal Vs. Parwati Devi and ors. and Kali PaharIn and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR399; [2005(1)JCR258b(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Since in both the appeals filed by the owners of the bus, common question of law and facts are involved, the same are being heard and disposed of by this common judgment.2. M.A. No. 292 of 2003 is directed against the judgment and award passed by the Claims Tribunal, Dumka in Title (Claims) Suit No. 3 of 1992 whereby a sum of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded.3. The facts of this case are that the deceased along with other persons were travelling by bus on 19.2.1992. The deceased was sitting on the roof of the bus. When the bus reached near Jaruadih More, several Mango tree branches were spread towards road and the deceased, who was on the roof of the bus, sustained several grievous head injuries. The deceased was taken to hospital and subsequently he died.4. M.A. No. 399 of 1999 is directed against the judgment and award passed by the Claims Tribunal, Pakur in Claim Case No. 5 of 1997 whereby a sum of Rs. 58,850/- was awarded to the claimants on account of death of the de...
Tag this Judgment!Pushpa Kumari (Smt.) Vs. Parichhit Pandey @ Ashutosh Pandey and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR486; [2005(1)JCR134(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellant-respondent No. 1 is directed against the judgment dated 16.6.2000 and decree dated 27.6.2000 passed in Title (Matrimonial) Suit No. 12 of 1996 whereby and whereunder the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bokaro allowed the suit in favour of the plaintiff and against the appellant-respondent No. 1.2. The case of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 in brief is that Parichhit Pandey (c) Ashutosh Pandey (plaintiff) was married to Smt. Pushpa Kumari (appellant-respondent No. 1) according to Hindu rites and customs on 11.5.1995 at Bokaro Steel City at the residence of respondent No. 2. After solemnization of the marriage, the appellant-respondent No. 1 went to her matrimonial house at Gharmandha, Sindri, within the district of Purulia and within two to three days of her marriage, her father brought appellant respondent No. 1 to his residence and thereafter appellant-respondent No. 1 did not return to her matrimonial house...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Gandhi Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR511; 2005CriLJ2818; [2005(1)JCR286(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. By filing this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 18.1.1999, taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 420/468/379/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and the entire criminal proceeding against him.2. The facts in brief are that a First Information Report being Govindpur P.S. Case No. 305 of 1993 was registered under Sections 420/468/471/379/120B of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of written report submitted by the Inspector (Food), C.I.D. Dhanbad, against the accused persons named in the FIR including the petitioner. The gist of the allegations made in the FIR is that on the basis of a complaint by one Mr. M.P. Narang of M/s. Narang Hard Coke Manufacturing, Barwa Adda, his Hard Coke Factory premises was inspected on 13.6.1993; 14.6.1993; 16.6.1993 and 16.8.1993. During inquiry, it was found that the accused, R.K. Jain was illegally using the factory premises for the purpo...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar, Political Deptt. (General and Transport) and ors. Vs. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR392; [2005(1)JCR138(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal at the instance of appellant is directed against the judgment dated 13.4.2000 and decree dated 20.4.2000 passed in Money Suit No. 176 of 1987 whereby and whereunder the 2nd Sub-Ordinate Judge, Bokaro at Chas decreed the suit.2. The case of the plaintiff in brief is that plaintiff is a Government Undertaking Company which was entrusted with a large number of construction work within the Bokaro Steel Plant. The plaintiff was required to engage different types of machineries, cranes, tractors, shovels, etc. These machineries always remained engaged in the premises of Bokaro Steel Plant and they were never used on any public road. The Government of Bihar after due consideration, exempted certain type of vehicles from road tax which are engaged only within the enclosed premises of mines and tractors and issued a circular under letter No. AZ3030/66 PT.-4830, dated 31.8.1966 of Bihar Political Department to all the taxing authorities. It is stated that th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »