Jharkhand Court August 2004 Judgments
R.K. Construction Private Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR317(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter dated 8.7.2004 as also the letter dated 17.7.2004 issued by the Executive Engineer, Kharkal Link Canal Division, Mosabani and Branch Manager to the respondent-Bank respectively whereby the amount recovered by the Bank Guarantee furnished by the petitioner has been invoked and realized.3. It appears that petitioner was awarded certain contract for construction of excavation of Galudih Right Bank Main Canal. As against the said contract the Bank Guarantee was furnished by the petitioner. Some dispute arose and the matter was referred to the Arbitrator which is pending. The contention of Mr. M.S. Mittal, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the arbitrator in terms of order dated 21.7.2004 directed the Senior Branch Manager, Bank of India, Sakchi Branch, Jamshedpur not to encash the Bank Guarantee as demanded by the authority of the project but inspite of that Bank Guarantee has, been encashed. F...
Tag this Judgment!Amar Tekriwal Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1811; [2004(4)JCR570(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. This revision application Under Section 397/401 CrPC is directed against the order dated 14.7.2003 passed by Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Dumka in P.C.R. Case No. 198 of 1999 whereby petition for discharge filed by the petitioner has been rejected. 2. The aforesaid criminal case arose out of a complaint petition filed by opposite party No. 2 alleging inter alia that the petitioner negotiated with the complainant for transporting 12,00 liters of kerosene oil from IOC depot Bhagalpur to his business premises at Pathargama on payment of Rs. 1,150/- as per the agreement, The complainant got loaded kerosene oil in his tank lorry from Depot for delivery to the destination. The consignment reached the business premises of the petitioner at Pathargama on 25.8.1998 and the consignment of kerosene oil was being unloaded inside, the business premises of the petitioner but during the course of unloading the accused and his staff suddenly stop Unloading process on accoun...
Tag this Judgment!Bhuneshwar Koeiry @ Bhuneshwar Mahto and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and o ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR138(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioners have challenged the order as contained in Annexure-6 dated 24.5.1980 in SAR Case No. 13 of 1979 passed by the Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation, Ranchi, directing the restoration of land pertaining the R.S. Plot No. 378 under Khata No. 5, area 0.99 acres, situated at Village Bhandra, P.S. Bero, District Ranchi, in favour of respondent Nos. 5 and 6, the order as contained in Annexure-7 dated 27.5.1986 passed by the Addl. Collector, Ranchi, in SAR Appeal No. 266 of 1980-1981, dismissing the appeal, filed by these petitioners and the order contained in Annexure-8 dated 14.7.1986 in Ranchi Revenue Revision No. 316 of 1986, passed by the Commissioner, dismissing the revision application, filed by these petitioners.3. The case of the petitioners is that the land bearing R.S. Plot No. 378 under Khata No. 5 measuring 0.99 acres situated at Village Bhandra, P.S. Bero, District Ranch! stands recorded in R.S. record of, right in...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Mulla Ansari @ DevruddIn Ansari and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR340(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by three petitioners, named above, for Issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction to the respondents to pay them the entire compensation amount, due to them on account of loss suffered by them in respect of their family members, namely Manjar Alam. Mustafa Ansari and Sujia Khatoon, who became the victims of the rioting mob, which took place on 20t.h/21st March, 2000 in village Rajpura, and died.2. From the facts, as pleaded by the petitioners and not disputed by the respondents, it appears that a riot took place on 20th/21st March, 2000 in Rajpura Village within Godda Police Station. Godda on the day of Holi festival. The mob, consisting of two to three thousand people of a particular community, entered into the minority (Muslim) locality, while dancing and enjoying on the street. Suddenly there was a confrontation between the two communities, which resulted into violence, riot and destructions, all around. The mob...
Tag this Judgment!Special Officer of Hazaribagh Municipality Vs. Vijay Mahajan
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR473(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the defendant-appellant against the judgment and decree of affirmance passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge Hazaribagh in Title Appeal No. 59/96 upholding the judgment and decree of Munsif, Hazaribagh in Title Suit No. 96/95 by which the suit filed by the plaintlff-respondent-respondcnt was decreed. The plaintiff had filed the said suit praying relief for declaration that he is a rightful lessee of the defendant in respect of the suit land and for confirmation of his possession and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendant not to demolish the construction already made thereon. The plaintiffs case was that the suit property was settled with his ancestors, namely, Gajadharlal Sao under Patta dated 4.2.1931 from the Hazaribagh Municipality measuring an area of 1 Khata 5 Dhurs and 6 Dhurkis in Plot No. 720. The said Gajadharlal Sao thereafter constructed a double storied house after getting his building plan d...
Tag this Judgment!Mathura Prasad Thakur Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR591(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioner applied for appointment to the post of Primary Teacher in Sanskrit in any of the Primary School, in pursuance of the advertisement dated 15th April, 1986, issued in the newspaper 'Aaj.' After interview, the districtwise panel was prepared and in pursuance of circular dated 2nd July, 1989, persons 'belonging to other districts, were not empanelled. Aggrieved with the same, a number of persons preferred writ applications for ,in inclusion of their names in the panel, including the petitioners, who filed CWJC No. 1918 of 1989 (R) for similar relief. Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court vide order dated 28th July, 1995 while disposed of the writ petitioner and others against the existing vacancies or in case of no vacancy, against the future vacancies. However, when the claim of the petitioner was rejected vide letter No. 4881, dated 14th November, 1996, on the ground that he had not appeared at the interview, -held on 2nd May, 1987, he preferred CWJC No....
Tag this Judgment!Bihar State Housing Board (Now Jharkhand State Housing Board at Ranchi ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR697(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment and decree of affirmance passed by the District Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan in Title Appeal No. 62/99 dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment and decree dated 14.9.99 passed by the Munsif, Serikella in Title Suit No. 5/92.2. Both the Courts below have concurrently found that the plaintiff- respondent has valid and legal right, title and interest. The plaintiffs suit was decreed on contest and after thorough appraisal of evidences and materials on record. On appeal, the said judgment and decree of the trial Court has been found sound and legal and on thorough consideration of the facts and points of law.3. In this appeal Mr. Umesh Pd. Singh learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that judgment and decrees of the Courts below are vitiated on account of non-consideration of materials on record and for not framing proper and relevant issues. From pe...
Tag this Judgment!Bihar State Housing Board (Now Jharkhand State Housing Board at Ranchi ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR540(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of affirmance passed by the District Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan upholding and affirming the judgment and decreed passed in Title Suit No. 1092.2. Both the Courts below have concurrently found that the plaintiff-respondent has valid and legal right, title and interest. The plaintiffs suit was decreed on contest and after thorough appraisal of evidences and materials on record. On appeal, the said judgment and decree of the trial Court has been found sound and legal and on through consideration of the facts and points of law.3. In this appeal, Mr. Umesh Pd. Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that judgments and decrees of the Courts below are vitiated on account of non- consideration of materials on record and for not framing proper and relevant issues. From perusal of judgment and decree of the trial Court. I find that all the relevant issues were ...
Tag this Judgment!Om Metals and Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar, Through the Secre ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR738(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. This miscellaneous appeal arises out of the judgment/order dated 17.1.1996 passed by the sub-ordinate Judge-I, in Title Suit No. 99 of 1992, whereby and where under in a proceeding under Section 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), he refused to direct the opposite party-State of Bihar to file the Arbitration agreement dated 25.2.1990 in Court and for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute and differences having arisen in between the parties and to refer the dispute and differences as has been arisen in between the parties to the Arbitrator so appointed on the ground, inter alia, that there were sufficient cause shown by the State of Bihar against non-filing of the award. While passing this order the learned Court below also considered that there were several overwriting, additions. Insertions and interpolations made in the tender documents as also in the agreement and the plaintiff had acted as per the l...
Tag this Judgment!Mandal Murmu and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR694(Jhr)]
ORDERTapan Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H. Patwari, J.C. to G.P. III and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed off at this stage.2. The five petitioners herein pray for issuance of a writ of mandamus upon the respondents for orders of posting and also to pay arrears and current salary to them as they are due since February, 2001 together with interest @ 12% per annum.3. The petitioners were appointed on the post of 'Dalpatis' in different panchayats in the district of Dhanbad. One Ashok Kumar Mishra along with others (who were also working as 'Dalpatis' in the district of Dhanbad) filed a writ petition being CWJC No. 3831 of 1995 (R) for promotion to the next higher post of 'panchayat sewak'. That writ petition was withdrawn on account of an affidavit filed by the State to the effect that the appointment of panchayat sewak in the district of Dhanbad was under process. The withdrawal of the writ petition came on 12.12.199...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »