Jharkhand Court June 2004 Judgments
Beni Mahto Vs. Hulas Mahto
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR356(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the defendant-appellant has been preferred against the impugned judgment and decree dated 4.4.1990 and 18.4.1990 respectively passed in Title Appeal No. 65 of 1988/1 of 1990 by Shri Shyama Prasad Singh, 2nd Additional District Judge, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder the appeal was dismissed affirming the judgment and decree of the Trial Court with modification directing the defendant-appellant to execute a deed of correction and the suit of the plaintiff was decreed in full.2. The plaintiff-respondent had filed the said title suit for declaration of this title and confirmation of his possession over 2 decimals of land in the northern side in plot No. 2644 appertaining to Khata No. 170 detailed in Schedule A of the plaint and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the suit land or any portion thereof or distributing and ousting the plaintiffs from the possession of the suit land. A further relief was als...
Tag this Judgment!Larsen and Toubro Limited Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR455(Jhr)]; [2005]140STC134(Jharkh)
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. Section 25-A of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 has been the subject matter of controversy. The section provides for advance recovery of tax payable under that Act. Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 26 of that Act, Section 25-A provides that every person responsible for making any payment of sale price or any amount purporting to be the full or part payment of sale price or any payment in discharge of any liability on account of valuable consideration payable in respect of transfer of property in goods, whether as goods or in some other form, involved in the execution of a works contract has to deduct an amount, at a rate specified by the State Government, in a notification published in the official Gazette purporting to be a part or full amount of tax payable on the sale of such goods from every bill or invoice raised by a works contractor engaged by him. The petitioner in this writ petition, M/s. Larsen & Tubro challenged the said provision, as it...
Tag this Judgment!Rajneesh Mishra Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR364(Jhr)]
ORDER1. In pursuance of Court's order, Mr. Kulwant Sahay, Chief Engineer, Building Construction Department, Ranchi, who is present in the Court, says that the Bar Bhawan shall be competed by 15th July, 2004 and immediate step shall be taken for construction of the boundary wall, which may take about 2 to 3 months time. The approach road shall be constructed by M/s. ADISONS Constructions Limited as per the agreement.2. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the Arun Kumar Singh, Managing Director of M/s. ADISONS Construction Limited, Kolkata, the following statements have been made :'4. That however even after inauguration, some touch up and additional work as may be suggested to be done shall be completed by M/s. ADISONS Construction Limited as and when desired.5. That however, on 21.6.2003 the learned District Judge of Jamshedpur had given directions for secondary works which is continuing and majority of which is likely to be completed by 7th July, 2004. The following works have been en...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bimla Varta Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR362(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the Dhanbad Municipality, the learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Jharkhand and Mr.Jerath, counsel for the Pollution Control Board.2. The petitioner raised objections to the construction of a sulabh shauchalaya within the Dhanbad Municipality. The petitioner is seen to be the owner of a residential house lying adjacent to the site wherein the sulabh shauchaluya was proposed to be constructed. The petitioner approached this Court on a plea that public interest will suffer and pollution will increase if the shauchalaya is established in the site in question. Various contentions were sought to be raised by counsel for the petitioner with particular reference to Section 215 of the Blhar Municipal Manual and Section 25 of the Water (Prevention and .Control of Pollution) Act. The Dhanbad Municipality appeared and contended that the construction of the shauchalaya had progressed to a great extent and that there was no grou...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadeo Prasad Shrivastav Vs. the High Court of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4392; [2005(1)JCR394(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya. J.1. The petitioner was convicted on 23rd April, 2002 Under Section 420, I.P.C. by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in G. R. case No. 918 of 1990 and was sentenced to undergo R/I for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo S/I for three months. The appeal No. 36 of 2002 preferred by petitioner against the judgment of conviction and sentence was also dismissed on 16th August, 2003 by learned 4th Additional Judicial Commissioner-cum-Special Judge, CBI (AHD Scam), Ranchi.Against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and sentence/appellate order, the petitioner stated to have preferred a criminal revision application (number not given) before this Court challenging the correctness, legality and propriety of his conviction and sentence.2. Under Rule 159 of the 'High Court of Jharkhand Rules, 2001', the petitioner is required to submit a surrender certificate. If he has not surrendered, a petition to be accompanied by an applicat...
Tag this Judgment!Kandey Hembrom Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1562
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The appellant, Kandey Hembrom having been convicted Under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life for committing murder of three innocent minor girls, namely, Sukru Kui (aged about 8 years), daughter of Sanika Munda, Budhani Kui (aged about 9 years), daughter of Hesel Munda and Sukru Kui (aged about 6 years), daughter of Soma Munda, have challenged the judgment dated 6th June, 1994 passed by learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Sessions Trial No. 157 of 1992.2. The prosecution case as per fardbeyan of informant, Sanika Munda (PW-1) is that on 20th September, 1991 (Friday) when he was working in his field, in between 4 to 5 P.M., Chara Purty of his village came to him and asked him to return to his house as everything was not good. When he (PW-1) rushed and reached his house, his wife, Jambi Kui informed that the accused, Kandey Hembrom son of Surjan Hembrom of village Durdurda had inflicte...
Tag this Judgment!Sunder Bouri Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-29-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR248(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. B.S. Lal, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Jharkhand.2. In the instant case the petitioner prays for quashing the order dated 23.4.1998 passed by the respondent No. 2 as contained in Annexure-5 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment on the post of chowkidar. The petitioner also prays for a direction upon the respondents to the effect that they may be mandated to issue a formal letter of appointment so that they give effect to the earlier order dated 27.8.1991 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer and as contained in Annexure-2.3. It is not necessary for this Court to repeat the facts as pleaded in the instant case because another Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court has very aptly and briefly summarized the gist of the lis which is involved herein. This order is dated 9.12.1999 and it reads thus :--'One Pandu Bouri was appointed as chowkidar on 28th Octobe...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Roy Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-29-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR367(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the parties.2. A Jeep bearing No, BRD-7267, registered in the name of the wife of the petitioner was apprehended while in the said vehicle kattha was illegally being smuggled. Accordingly, the petitioner who was considered in the rank of Havildar in the Police Force was proceeded departmentally and a criminal case under Sections 414 and 413, IPC as well as under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act was also registered in which the petitioner was named and accused. It was established in the Departmental proceeding that the charged Havildar i.e the petitioner after purchasing the jeep in the name of his wife used to ply the same on hire and in the said jeep he had made a provision for carrying. The illegal 'kattha' in most secret manner. After the charges were proved in the departmental proceeding against the petitioner, the Disciplinary Authority i.e. Lhe Superintendent of Police. Palamau considering the serious nature of charges against a member of the disciplined force, o...
Tag this Judgment!Shagufta Rahat Bano @ Shagufa Rahat and ors. Vs. Vinoba Bhave Universi ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-29-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR387(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the parties.2. The prayer of the petitioners in this writ application is for direction to the respondents, particularly respondent No. 2, Vice-Chancellor, Vinoba Bhawe University, Hazaribagh. to allow the petitioners to appear in BA and B. Corn. Part-1 examination, which was going to start from 20.6.2002.3. This Court by an interim order dated 18.6.2002 allowed the petitioners to appear provisionally in the said examination and the University was directed to accept the forms. Accordingly, it is stated that the petitioners had appeared in the said examination but the result has been kept pending.4. The grievance of the petitioner is that though they were regular students of the Coalfield College, Bhaga but due to some dispute between the two groups of the Governing Body of the College, their Registration Forms etc. were not submitted to the University and, therefore, for no fault on their part, they were deprived from appearing in the examination.5. The Vinoba Bhave Univer...
Tag this Judgment!Anjuman Islamia Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-29-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR315(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This writ petition filed by some of the members of the Anjuman Islamia having its registered office at Anjuman Plaza, challenges the constitution of a Management Committee for Anjuman Islamia by the Bihar State Sunny Waqf Board. The order is dated 19.12.2003 and by that order, taking note of the fact that the tenure of the last elected Managing Committee of the Anjuman Islamia had expired on 25.9.1999 and that no new Managing Committee has been elected, the Bihar State Sunny Waqf Board constituted a Committee of 11 members for better management of the Institution and specifying that the life of the Committee would be one year from the date of the notification. According to the petitioner, the Bihar State Sunny Waqf Board, has no jurisdiction to constitute such a Committee after the Bihar Re- organization Act, 2000 came into force and it is for the State of Jharkhand to constitute a Waqf Board for the State and consequently, the order of appointment of the Committee is without j...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »