Jharkhand Court May 2004 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.
Chaitali Dey Vs. Badal Kumar Dey
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Jhar83; 2004(2)BLJR1484; I(2005)DMC126; [2004(3)JCR598(Jhr)]
1. This appeal is by the defendant in Matrimonial Suit No. 41/55 of 1997-2001 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur, Singhbhum East.2. The defendant challenges the decree for divorce granted by the Family Court under Section 13(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.3. In so far as it is relevant for the purpose of this appeal, the husband, the petitioner before the Family Court, came up with a case that his wife was behaving cruelly towards him; that she was not preparing and serving food to him; that she, was quarrelsome, that she left him without telling him and started living in her father's house and that she had behaved cruelly towards him, his mother and his widowed sister-in-law. Since, her conduct was such as to amount to cruelty within the meaning of Section 13(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, he was entitled for a decree for divorce.4. The wife denied that she had behaved cruelty towards her husband. She, on the other hand, pleaded that her husband had ill treate...
Shiv Prasad Sharma @ Sheo Prasad Sharma and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhan ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)BLJR1527; [2004(3)JCR638(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction dated 22.8.2001 and sentence dated 24.8.2001 passed by Shri Mahesh Prasad Tiwari, learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Sessions Trial No. 60 of 1992 convicting the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 149, IPC and under Section 147, IPC sentencing each of them for life imprisonment under Section 302/149, IPC and R.I. for one year under Section 147, IPC directing both sentences in each count in respect of both the convicts shall run concurrently.2. The facts leading to this criminal appeal arises on the fardbeyan of Gautam Prasad Singh (PW 6) recorded by Inspector L.M. Prasad (PW 7) of Deoghar PS on 25.4.1989 at 9.00 a.m. in Deoghar Hospital on which informant signed (Ext. 2) Informant along with Prem Kumar Singh (not examined) was sitting at Machhalia Kothi of his uncle Ramawatar Singh at Bilasi town outside the gate south of chabutara, whereas Kantu Singh (PW 9) was sitt...
Amresh Chandra Jha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR462(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the respondents whereby his claim for payment of 20 per cent additional pay for discharging the additional duty of Director, Agriculture for a period from 1.2.1999 to 31.12.2000 has been rejected.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass :Petitioner, at the relevant time, was appointed as Joint Director, Agriculture Centre, in Divisional Agriculture Office, Ranchi on 11.12.1998 and remained on the said post till his retirement i.e. 31.12.2000. Petitioner's case in that while he was posted as Joint Director, Agriculture he was given additional charge of Director, Agriculture from 1.2.1999 to 31.12.2000. During that period petitioner said to have discharged full duty of Director, Agriculture and became entitled to 20 per cent extra emoluments for discharging the additional work of Director. Agriculture. It is contended by the petitioner that he filed several representations for payment of additional allowance but the same...
Ram Dulari Mahant Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)BLJR2036; II(2004)DMC615; [2006(1)JCR174(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for setting aside the order dated 9.11.2000 passed in PCR Case No. 470/2000, T.R. No. 601 /2000, whereby the learned Magistrate has come to a finding that prima facie case under Sections 498A and 323, IPC is made out.2. Facts giving rise to the filing of this application are that the opposite party No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as 'complainant') filed a complaint case bearing PCR Case No. 470/2000 before the learned CJM, Godda stating therein that she was legally married wife of Dr. Nand Kishore Thakur, who is accused No. 1 in the complaint case, and the marriage was solemnized on 12.3.1972 and after marriage she went to Sasural, where she lived happily with her husband and out of wedlock a son was born on 15.8.1978. The complainant came to know that her husband has illicit relationship with petitioner-accused, who was working as a nurse and he has got illegitimate child ...
Rajendra Khalko Vs. Ranchi Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR379(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the notice dated 28.2.2002, i.e. Annexure-2 issued by the Ranch! Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, whereby the petitioner has been asked to remove the encroachment within a period of one week otherwise the said encroachment shall be removed forcibly and the cost of such removal could be realised from the petitioner.3. The said notice (Annexure-2) was issued to the petitioner as well as two others but this writ application is confined to the notice issued to the petitioner only. The grievance of the petitioner is that prior to issuance of Annexure-2, the petitioner was not given any notice nor any measurement was made in his presence with regard to the alleged encroachment.4. The petitioner by his letter dated 11.3.2002, (Annexure-3) addressed to the Administrator, stated that he has not encroached any land of the Corporation and requested that let a measurement be made in his presence of the lands i...
Modi Construction Company Vs. Rites Limited, Govt. of India Enterprise ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ARBLR451(Jhar)
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition was preferred by petitioner against the order dated 13th June, 2003 passed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, Jharkhand High Court in his administrative capacity in A.A. No. 22 of 2002, whereby and whereunder one Mr. Lalit Kapoor, General Manager (Property Development) RITES was appointed as third Arbitrator out of the list submitted on behalf of the respondents.2. The main plea as was taken by the petitioner is that the appointment of Mr. Lalit Kapoor, General Manager (Property Development) RITES was contrary to the Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as also the other grounds as mentioned in the writ petition.3. Before deciding the issue, it is relevant to notice Clause 63(b) of the agreement, which reads as follows:'63(b) For the purpose of appointing two Arbitrators as referred to in sub clause (a)(ii) above, the RITES will send a panel of more than three names of RITES officers of one or more departments of the RITES to th...
Anirudh Singh and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2004
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR199(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 7.3.2003 passed by S.D.J.M., Chatra by which cognizance was taken under Section 468/120-B, IPC in Complaint Case No. 177 of 2002.2. Facts giving rise to the filing of this application are that the father of the complainant had three brothers, namely, Ram Kumar Singh, Ram Nagina Singh and Bishwanath Singh and their father's name was Late Deoki Singh. The name of Deoki Singh was entered in Khata Nos. 1, 7, 3, 10 and 19 in Survey Khatian. The second son of Late Deoki Singh was Ram Nagina Singh who had only one son, Mushan Singh alias Dinanath Singh who died issueless in the year 1975. The entire acquired property of the grant father of the complainant was distributed among the uncles and after the death of his uncle, Ram Nagina Singh and thereafter the death of Mushan Singh alias Dinanath Singh Son of Late Ram Nagina Singh, who died issueless in t...
Lakshmi Narayan Tudu @ Lakshmi Narayan Manjhi Vs. Smt. Basi Majhian an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-11-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar121; [2004(3)JCR168(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J. 1. This appeal at the instance of the defendants-appellant has been directed against the impugned judgment and decree of affirmation dated 9.9.1989 and 18.8.1989 respectively passed in Title Appeal No. 16 of 1981 by Shri P. Xaxa 1st Additional District Judge, Singhbhum at Chaibasa whereby and whereunder the judgment dated 25.5.1981 passed in Title Suit No. 33 of 1980 by Subordinate Judge, Singhbhum, Chaibasa decreeing the suit was affirmed and the said appeal was dismissed.2. The plaintiffs-respondent have filed the said title suit for metes and bounds partition of the suit property detailed in Schedule B of the plaint claiming half share therein and for carving out a separate takhta of their half share by appointing a competent Commissioner.3. The case of the plaintiffs-respondent, in brief, is that parties to the suit are descendants of their common ancestor Bhaktu Manjhi deceased who died leaving behind his two sons, namely, Jhuttu Manjhi and Baya Manjhi. Said ...
Tarun Kumar Alley Vs. Jharkhand State Housing Board Through Its M.D. a ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-11-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR509(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application, as it appears, is that without issuance of any prior notice, the demand, as contained in Annexure-6 to the writ application, has been raised by the Jharkhand State Housing Board, asking the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 66,443/-. The claim of the petitioner is that the said demand has been raised against the terms and conditions of the agreement executed between him and the Housing Board.3. The learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the maintainability of this writ application before this Court on the ground that there is an arbitration clause in the agreement itself and, therefore, the petitioner should go for arbitration to settle the dispute with regard to the amount and the demand raised by the Board. In support of his submissions Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned counsel for the Housing Board has produced before me an order dated 4/12/2003 passed in WP (C) No. 58...
Central Coalfields Ltd. and ors. Vs. Tribeni Prasad
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-11-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)BLJR2010; [2004(3)JCR196(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. Both the aforementioned two Letters Patent Appeals are taken up together, but for convenience, we will deal with L.P.A. No. 541 of 1999(R) first. This letters patent appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1.11.1999 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2228 of 1998(R) by a learned Single Judge of this Court, by which the writ petition filed by the respondent Shri Tribeni Prasad was allowed.2. In the writ petition, the respondent herein had prayed for a direction upon the respondents for quashing the communication of 'Inadequate' ratings for the periods 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-1997 which were communicated by confidential letter Nos. 2724 dated 08.08.1997, 2708 dated 29.07.1997 and 3114 dated 17.10.1997 as contained in Annexure 1, 1/a and 1/b therein. By reason of Annexure 1, the respondent was informed that his overall grading for the period April 1994 October 1994 and 27.10.1994 to 31.03.1995 was 'Inadequate'. Similary, by Annexure 1/a, the respondent was informed that his ov...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »