Jharkhand Court September 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.
Indian Oil Corporation and ors. Vs. Shiv Shankar Singh and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR188(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 12.3.2004 passed in Execution Case No. 13 of 2000 whereby petition filed by the petitioner under Order XXI, Rule 99 read with Rule 101 of CPC has been rejected holding the same not maintainable.2. Admittedly, the petitioner was not a party to the arbitration award dated 1.6.2000 which was sought to be executed in Execution Case No. 13 of 2000 in the Court of Sub-Ordinate Judge, 1st Court, Dhanbad.3. The petitioner's case is that the petitioner is a Corporation, a Government Company, and it had a retail outlet at Belchari in Dhanbad District. In the year 1995, the petitioner-company had allotted retail outlet to respondent No. 2, Ammlal Kisku under the Scheduled Tribe category, on certain terms and conditions described in the letter of offer dated 4.9.1995. Respondent No. 2 is merely a licensee to run the said retail outlet. It was stipulated in term No. 18 that the respondent No. ...
Shushila Devi Khandelwal and ors. Vs. Santulal Khandelwal and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR592(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. This first appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed in Title Partition Suit No. 103/1985 by the Subordinate Judge. Ill, Jamshedpur, whereby and whereunder a preliminary decree for partition of 1/2 share in the suit properties was directed to be prepared with a further direction that the plaintiff would be entitled to appoint a Pleader Commissioner for demarcating 1/3rd share.2. The plaintiff-respondent, Santulal Khandetwal. has filed the Title Partition Suit No. 103/1985 against his two brothers, namely, Bhanwar Lal Khandelwal and Ramanand Khandelwal. The father is admittedly dead. It was a suit for partition of his 1/3rd share in the joint family properties by metes and bounds. The suit land consists of a double storeyed building standing over a piece of land measuring 6-1/2 Kathas approximately, appertaining to R.S. Plot No. 1628, R.S. Khan No. 19, Recent Survey Plot No. 146, Municipal Holding No. 127, Station Road, Kashidih, and valu...
Krishna Chandra Jerai Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: I(2005)DMC437; [2004(4)JCR282(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard Mr. Ananda Sen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. R.P. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for opposite party No. 2.2. From the judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, contained in Annexure-2, it appears that the proceeding under Section 125. Cr PC initiated at the instance of the opposite party No. 2 herein, whereby she had prayed for grant of maintenance, was rejected on the ground that she failed to prove that she was legally wedded wife of the petitioner herein Krishna Chandra Jerai. It appears that the learned Magistrate after considering the evidence on record held that it was not proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the applicant was the legal wife of the petitioner herein.3. It further appears that in the proceeding before the Magistrate it was admitted by the petitioner herein that both the parties, i.e. the applicant (O.P. No. 2 herein) and the petitioner Krishna Chandra Jerai lived together as husband and wife ...
Gorang Chandra Singh Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR492(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. According to petitioner, he retired from the Services of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board on 31.1.2003 as Head Lines Man, Electric Supply Sub-Division, Madhupur. Some of the retirement benefits such as group saving scheme amount, leave encashment amount and provisional pension have been paid, but, he has not been provided with other benefits such as gratuity. G.P.F. arrears of salary in the revised scale of pay since 1st April, 1997 nor his pension has been finalized.2. Counsel for the Jharkhand State Electricity Board submitted that the matter will be looked into if the petitioner represents before the competent authority. The case is accordingly remitted to the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Dumka Area, Dumka to determine the claim of the petitioner. If any amount is found payable to the petitioner he will ensure that the amount is paid to him after finalization of pension within a period of three months fr...
Paresh Chandra Singh Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR688b(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. According to petitioner, he retired from the services of Jharkhand State Electricity Board on 31st October, 2003 as Head Electrician from Jamtara Electric Supply Sub-Division, Jamtara. His grievance is that the respondents have not paid him the retrial benefits such as Provident fund, gratuity, group saving scheme, unutilized earned leave and pension etc. Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is entitled for arrears in the revised scale of pay but it has also not been paid to the petitioner.2. Having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case, as the claim made by the petitioner requires to be determined by the competent authority at first instance, instead of deciding the case on merit, it is remitted to the General Manager-cum Chief Engineer, Dumka Area, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Dumka. The said authority will enquire the matter from the .concerned office and determine the claim and pay the admitted retrial ...
Priya Ranjan Bhagat and anr. Vs. Pradeep Kumar Bhagat and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR296(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 3.9.1991 and decree dated 13.9.1991 passed in Title (Partition) Suit No. 86 of 1988 whereby and where under the learned Subordinate Judge, V at Ranchi decreed the suit in part in favour of the plaintiffs.2. The case of the plaintiffs-appellants in brief is that Lachan Lal Bhagat was the common ancestor of the parties and he had sixty acres of agricultural land in different villages in Ranchi District. Out of income from agricultural and non-agricultural properties, he on 20.4.1934 acquired ten kathas of land in Old Commissioner's compound mentioned in Schedule-B of the plaint in the name of Nandlal Bhagat who was his only son and the building was constructed over the said land. After the death of Lachan Lal Bhagat in 1956 and soon thereafter Nandlal Bhagat too died on 13.10.1973 and after death of Nandlal Bhagat, who left behind him three sons namely, Santosh Lal Bhagat, Mahendra Lal Bhagat and Ranjit Lal Bhagat. Hi...
Bishnudeo Sah Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-07-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR300(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. This writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents to accept his date of birth as 15th June. 1959 as recorded in his service book. Further prayer has been made to prohibit the respondents from accepting the medical report in respect of his date of birth.2. According to the petitioner, his date of birth is 15th June, 1959, but the respondents are treating his date of birth as 14th December, 1949 on the basis of a medical report, which is illegal. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the father of the petitioner was also in the services of the Electricity Board and in his service book, his date of birth was recorded as 1st July, 1937 and if the date of birth of the petitioner is accepted as in the year 1949, it will be presumed that the petitioner was born only twelve years after the birth of his father, which will incorrect and improper.3. From the copy of the extract of the service book annexed by t...
Sudhir Kumar Vs. Dr. Ram Autar Prasad and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-07-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR482(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 2.8.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Dhanbad in Misc. Appeal No. 55 of 2003 whereby and whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 2.8.2003 passed in Title Suit No. 72 of 2002 rejecting the prayer for injunction made under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been dismissed.2. The petitioner-plaintiff filed the Title Suit No. 72 of 2001 in the Court of Munsif, Dhanbad praying relief, inter alia, for a decree declaring that the plaintiff having paid Rs. 2.04.000/- to the defendant No, 1 is entitled for transfer of joint 'B' A/C (MIS) No. 155048 of Garga Check Post Office in his own name alone and for permanent injunction retraining the defendants from allowing operation/closure/ withdrawal of any amount of MIS joint A/D No. 155048 without consent and knowledge of the pl...
Bhagwati Charan Bharti Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Deputy Commissio ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-03-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR283(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 11.6.2002 passed in Title Appeal No. 2/01 passed by the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Latehar setting aside the judgment and decree dated 23.11.2000 passed in Title Suit No. 4/97.2. The plaintiff is the appellant. He filed a suit praying decree for declaration of title and recovery of possession over the suit property. The suit property measured only 1 decimal of Plot No. 715 under Khata No. 71 of village-Alaudia, Tola Haria P.S. Chandwa, District Latehar. The said Plot Nos. 715 has a total area of 86 decimals. It was recorded as garmazruwa malik of the ex-landlord. According to the plaintiff, out of the total area the ex-landlord has settled 29 decimals of land in the said plot in favour of the plaintiffs father Deodhari Bharti and others in the year 1938. According to the plaintiff, they had been coming in possession of the said land. The plaintiff claimed that although the deed was wit...
Awadh Bihari Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-03-2004
Reported in: I(2005)DMC138; [2004(4)JCR278(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard Mr. T.R. Bajaj, for the appellant and Mr. S.K. Dutta learned APP for the State.2. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 15th February, 2000, passed by Shri Sheo Kumar Prasad, learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No. 272 of 1997 convicting the appellants under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each.3. On the basis of a written report (Ext. 4) of Devendra Mohan Prasad (Informant PW 6) father of Baby @ Sunita Kumari (deceased) FIR (Ext. 6) was drawn. As per the written report, Sunita Kumari got married with Dr. Abinash Chandra Prabhakar (appellant No. 3) about a year ago. At the time of marriage, informant had given 'dahej' according to his capacity but the in-laws of the daughter were not satisfied with it and they used to demand more 'dahej' on telephone and through letters. On 7.3.1996, the informant gave a Maruti Car to his daughter in 'bedaigiri. T...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »