Jharkhand Court July 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.
A.K. Transport Vs. Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Reported in: I(2005)BC555; [2004(3)JCR577(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard Mr. Biren Poddar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Delip Jerath, learned counsel for the respondent Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd and the learned counsel appearing for the intervener.2. In these two writ petitions the petitioners have prayed for quashing Clause (2) of the tender notice bearing No. 7/Coal Trans. TVNL/RAN/04 dated 27.5.2004 issued by respondent No. 1 Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd (in short TVNL) for transportation of coal of on road from the collieries of West Bokaro of Central Coalfiled Ltd. to Tenughat Thermal Power Station, Lalpania and further for a direction to the respondents to issue tender papers to the petitioners as they fulfill all the eligible criteria laid down in the tender notice except the conditions contained in the aforesaid clause.3. Mr. Biren Poddar, learned Senior Counsel assailed the impugned tender notice particularly Clause (2) as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and malafide and amounts to depriving man...
Sambhu Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1805; [2004(4)JCR131(Jhr)]
ORDERVishnudeo Narayan, J.1. The appeal at the instance of the appellants has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 26.3.1999 passed in Sessions Trial No. 186 of 1997 by Shri Vinod Kumar Sinha, 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih hereby and whereunder appellants Bijay Singh and Pradeep Singh were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307/34, 324/34, 323/34 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years, one year, six months and one month respectively for the offences aforesaid and appellant Sambhu Singh was found guilty for the offence under Sections 307/109, 323/34 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years, six months, and one month respectively for the offences aforesaid. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently in respect of the appellants aforesaid. However, appellant Sambhu Singh was not found...
Most. Kasida Devi and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR331(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment and decree of the affirmance passed by the Additional District Judge, Dhanbad in Title Appeal No. 49 of 1992.2. The plaintiff is the appellant-appellant. He filed Title Suit No. 13/76 in the Court of Sub-Judge, Dhanbad which was ultimately tried and disposed of by the Sub-Judge, 5th Dhanbad.3. The plaintiff in the said suit had prayed for declaration of his title over the suit land as well as for declaration that the order dated 21.11.1986 passed by the L.R.D.C. Dhanbad in B.P.L.E. Case No. 25 of 1965, the order dated 9.8.1967 passed by the Collector of Dhanbad in M.R.A. No. 22 of 22/67 and the order dated 24.10.1967 passed by the Commissioner in Revision Petition No. 5/67 are null and void and the same have not affected the possessory right, title, interest and possession of the suit land.4. The plaintiff's case was that he had been in possession of the suit land being an area of 40 decimals of Plot No. 652 Khata No. ...
Masomat Kasida Devi and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar Now Jharkhand and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)BLJR1675
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment and decree of the affirmance passed by the Additional District Judge, Dhanbad in Title Appeal No. 49 of 1992.2. The plaintiff is the appellant-appellant, He filed Title Suit No. 13/76 in the Court of Sub-Judge, Dhanbad which was ultimately tried and disposed of by the Sub-Judge, 5th Dhanbad.3. The plaintiff in the said suit had prayed for declaration of his title over the suit land as well as for declaration that the order dated 21.11.1986 passed by the L.R.D.C. Dhanbad in B.P.LE. Case No. 25 of 1965, the order dated 9.8.1967 passed by the Collector of Dhanbad in M.R.A. No. 22 of 22/67 and the order dated 24.10.1967 passed by the Commissioner in Revision Petition No. 5/67 are null and void and the same have not affected the possessory right, title interest and possession of the suit land.4. The plaintiffs case was that he had been in possession of the suit land being an area of 40 decimals of plot No. 652 Khata No. 136 of M...
Bajrang Prasad Chourasia Vs. Sanjay Garg
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR739(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. The substantial question of law to be answered in this second appeal is as follows :-'Whether in absence of any finding that the plaintiff is not in a possession of the suit lands, his suit for a decree for permanent injunction could have been, dismissed only on the ground that he has, failed to prove his title, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Krishanlal Biharilal Maheshwari and Ors. v. Ramarao Hanumant Sao Ratil and Ors., reportd in AIR 1981 SC 1183 ?'2. The question aforesaid arose out of the following facts: The plaintiff brought a suit praying for the following reliefs :-(a) A decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from encroaching, upon the plaintiffs land of Schedule B and disturbing in any way the possession of the plaintiff either by defendant or through his men, agent and representtives.(b) Decree for all costs of the suit.(c) Decree for any other 'relief or reliefs to which the plaintiff is entitled under the law an...
Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR427(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. In all the cases, some of the questions being common and there being common petitioner in two writ petitions, they were taken up for hearing together, but nobody appeared in CWJC. No. 3839 of 1993 (R) - Jamshedpur Cement Ltd. v. Bihar State Electricity Board and Anr..2. In CWJC No. 746 of 1992 (R), the petitioner Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the TISCO) has challenged the order dated 24th December, 1991 passed by the Chief Engineer, South Bihar Chotanagpur Electricity Board, Ranchi (hereinafter referred to as the General Manager, Ranchi), whereby and whereunder, he allowed part of the claim of petitioner made under Clause 13 of the High Tension Agreement (hereinafter referred to as H.T. agreement) for reduction from the Annual Minimum Guarantee Charges (hereinafter referred to as the AMG charges) and Maximum Demand Charges (hereinafter referred to as the M.D. charges) in respect of the years 1977-78; 78-79 & 82-83.The petitioner TISCO h...
Ranjit Kumar Vs. Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. Through Its, Cmd a ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR200(Jhr)]
N.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 20.2,1996 as contained in Annexure-12 passed by the respondent No. 5 and also for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to give the same benefits of notional seniority to the petitioner as has been given to others similarly situated persons.2. According to the petitioner, the said order as contained in Annexure-12 is wholly arbitrary and illegal and the same is not sustainable in law in view of the order dated 7.12.1995 passed in CWJC No. 2578 of 1994(R).3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he was initially appointed to the post of artisan (fitter) on 21.8.1965 and was in the service of respondent No. 1. Subsequently he was posted in HMBP, a unit plant of HEC Limited. The petitioner was, thereafter, given promotion to the post of Fitter 'B' grade with effect from 20.2.1971 in the scale of Rs. 444-701. According to the petitioner, in the year 1977 respondent-cor...
Parikh Engineering and Body Building Company Limited Vs. Smt. Pramila ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: 2005ACJ2052; [2004(4)JCR505(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the parties.2. This appeal, at the instance of the owner of the vehicle, is directed against that part of the order by which the Tribunal directed the appellant to pay interest from the date of filing of application till 5.4.2002 when, for the first time. Insurance Company was impleaded as party in the said claim case.3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that it was because of the-serious laches and negligence on the part of the appellant that the Insurance Company was not impleaded as party in the said claim case, although the appellant. owner of the vehicle, disclosed all the necessary particulars and Insurance Policy by their objection dated 11.12.1995. a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the memo of appeal.4. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass :The claim case was filed in the year 1987 being Compensation Case No. 35/1987. From perusal of the claim petition, a copy of which has been produced by counsel for the claimant, it a...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Bhawa Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: 2005ACJ336; [2004(4)JCR514(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellant. New India Assurance Company Limited is directed against the judgment and award dated 30.9.2000 passed by District Judge-cum-MVACT, Giridih in M.V. Claim Case No. 37/1998 whereby a sum of Rs. 20,67,076/- together with interest at the rate of 12.5% has been awarded on account of death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident,2. Claimants are the mother/mother -In-law, sons and daughters of the deceased.3. The brief facts of the case is that on 16.7.1998 deceased Tuntun Kumar @ Tuntun Bhadani alongwith his wife late Asha Bhadani and others were going to Sultanganj by Car bearing registration No. BR-16-A-0377. As soon as the car reached near Makdiha line hotel at Jamua Chatro Road, a Leyland Truck bearing registration No. BRA 9821 loaded with scrap coming towards Chatro dashed the Ambassador car causing death of all the occupants including Tuntun Kumar and Asha Devi. It is alleged that the said accident took place due to ras...
Birsa Ahir Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4773
Lakshman Uraon, J. 1. Appellant Birsa Ahir has challenged the order of conviction and sentence dated 23-12-1989 whereby and whereunder he has been convicted under Section 302/34, IPC and Section 449, IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life under Section 302/34. IPC. However, no separate sentence was passed under Section 449, IPC in Sessions Trial No. 252 of 1988 arising out of G.R. No. 450 of 1988, Palkot PS Case No. 39 of 1988.2. Informant Thuma Oraon (P.W. 9) on 10-8-1988 at 18.30 hours was at his home along with his mother Chumani Oraon. His mother was preparing food, then appellant Birsa Ahir along with another villager Jakariyas Oraon (since dead) went there and abused his mother. They entered into his house, abused her. Jakariyas Oraon abused her that she played witch craft resulting death of his son. Both of them caught hold of hands of Chumani Oraon and took to the village Akhara where a committee was convened. Informant also followed his mother. He saw that both named accus...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »