Jharkhand Court January 2005 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.
Smt. Rani Shahi Vs. Biresh Prasad Shahi and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-31-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR70(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 24.11.2004 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge VIIth in Title Suit No. 25 of 1995 whereby the learned Court below has rejected the petition for amendment in plaint filed by the plaintiff-petitioner. According to the plaintiff, the suit was filed praying reliefs, interalia, for a declaration that Suresh Prasad Shahi has no right to transfer any portion of the property to the defendant by way of gift or otherwise and that purported deeds of gift dated 24.6.1974 are void-ab-tnitio. The suit was contested by defendant No. 2 contending, interalia, that the plaintiff has neither any right, title nor any possession over the suit property and that the defendant No. 2 has got his title through Suresh Prasad Shahi and he has been in possession. The said defendant has also taken a plea that the suit itself is barred by the provisions of Specific Reliefs Act, in view of the absence of ...
Dev Narayan Mahto and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-31-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR111(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties. They agreed for disposal of all these writ petitions by a common order.2. Petitioners have prayed for an order similar to the order dated 3.9.2002 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2683 of 2002 (Annexure-6).3. Learned State counsel submits that the said case was disposed of on first date of hearing. In the present case, counter affidavit have been filed. The Suberna Rekha Project remained in abeyance from 1990 to 1998 due to financial crunch. Huge establishment costs on account of 3,000 personnels already working there during this period continued during this period. In these circumstances, the Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar directed that appointments in vacant posts need not be made. There are ten separate components of Suberna Rekha Project. In 1998 work resumed in two components. Against this limited resumption of work, the number of employees already in service from before is quite large. After creation of State of Jharkhand steps have be...
Dr. Laxman Oraon Vs. Akhil Bhartiya Adivasi Vikash Parisad
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-31-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR104(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 29.4.2004 passed by the learned Sub-Judge I, Ranchi in Title Suit No. 24 of 2002 by which the Court below, once having accepted the written statement of the defendant, has held that the said written statement cannot be accepted in view of the belated filing of the same and that the time allowed to the defendant by the Court earlier for that purpose was by way of a routine. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Court, having once accepted the written statement and proceeded further, cannot subsequently reject the same on the ground that the same was not filed within the time prescribed by the newly amended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. According to the learned counsel, the Court itself has allowed time to file written statement and after filing the same, the written statement was accepted, the suit was fixed for settlement of issues and ...
Ramesh Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR28(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State.2. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with C.B.I. Case No. RC (4)/97 (D). 3. The petitioner about 1-1/2 years back moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail being A.B.A. No. 817/03 which was rejected on 10.9.2003 by passing the following order :'Heard both the sides.Earlier the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected but the petitioner did not surrender in the Court below in compliance of the direction in that order, given six months back.In the meantime the petitioner says that in another case his statement under Section 164 of the Cr PC has been recorded and he has prayed for making him an approver and therefore he should be released on anticipatory ball because all the cases are on similar footing.Had the statement of this petitioner been recorded in this case also under Section 164 Cr PC at the behest of the CBI its...
Neelam Kumari Vs. Deepak Kumar Jaiswal
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: I(2005)DMC653; [2005(2)JCR147(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 10/2004, the petitioner has prayed for transfer of Matrimonial Case No. 61/2004 from the Court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi to the Court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro at Chas or to any other competent Court, Bokaro at Chas and to direct him to hear Title (Matrimonial Suit No. 54/2004 along with Matrimonial Case No. 61/2004 at Bokaro.2. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent along with his brothers and friends abducted her forcibly from her residence i.e. Qr. No. 318, Sector III/E, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro on 3.11.2003 while she was alone in the house. A marriage certificate was obtained fraudulently, which is colourable and void. The petitioner has filed a petition on 11.5.2004 in the Court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro against the respondent for declaring the said marriage certificate, issued from the office of Non-Official Marriage Officer, Raghunathpur Sub-Divis...
Rajesh Gupta Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR491(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner has challenged the order of the Revisional Court dated 29.1.2004, allowing the Revision application and setting aside the order passed by the trial Court, refusing the prayer of the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 to release the cash amount of Rs. 60,000/- in his favour, which was seized by the Police in course of investigation of Jharia P.S. Case No. 28 of 2003 registered under Sections 392 and 411, IPC and directing the trial Court to release the aforesaid amount in favour of the informant/Opposite Party No. 2.3. Jharia P.S. Case No. 28 of 2003 was lodged on 30.1.2003 under Sections 392 and 411, IPC by the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 alleging therein that on 30th of January, 2003 at about 9.50 a.m., the miscreants variously armed with Revolver, Bhujali etc. came to the house of the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 and on the point of Revolver and Bhujali, they looted cash amounting to Rs. 60,000/-, which was kept in the ...
Sanjay Kumar Chouhan Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR391(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The only point that has been taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not aware of the date 13.11.2002 as 7.10.2002 was the date fixed earlier to 13.11.2002 and from 7.10.2002 the case was advanced to 13.11.2002 but on 7.10.2002 record was not placed before the transferee Court as the concerned record was transferred from one Court to another Court and record was not placed before the transferee Court on 7.10.2002, instead 7.10.2002 date was deleted and was given another date 13.11.2002 and as such petitioner had no knowledge of the change in date and, therefore, he could not appear and consequently on 22.11.2002 non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner and as such a prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 22.11.2002 and also subsequent order dated 20.1.2005 Issuing processes against him.3. From perusal for the order sheet, a certified copy of whic...
Krishna Pradhan Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: III(2005)BC388; [2005(1)JCR426(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Dilip Jerath, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K.K. Ojha, learned counsel for respondent No. 7 and the JC to Advocate General.2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 5.4.2004 issued under the signature of Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Project Building, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the agreement entered with the petitioner for execution of work has been cancelled and it has been ordered that fresh agreement be entered with the petitioner for the construction of road.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass :The concerned department of the respondent issued notice inviting tender being NIT No. 12/2002-03 for construction of road-bridge from Hardag to Hazam Path. Petitioner alongwith others participated in the said tender. The Department thereafter decided to allot the work in favour of two bidder i.e. petitioner and respondent No. 7 by bifurcating the works in two parts. Conseque...
Union of India (Uoi) Through Central Coal Fields Ltd. Vs. Haria Devi a ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR542; [2005(1)JCR395(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. All these appeals are directed against the common judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in Misc. Appeal Nos. 8 to 45 of 1997(R). By the said judgment all the aforementioned appeals filed by the appellant Union of India through Central Coalfields Ltd. has been allowed in part.2. The sole question that arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the Tribunal constituted under Section 14 of the Coal Bearing Area (Acquisition & Development) Act, 1957 was justified in awarding interest and solatium in absence of any such provision in the said Act of 1957 :3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.A Notification dated 9.1.1978 was issued under Section 4(1) of the Coal Bearing Area (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (in short the Act, of 1957) for acquisition of Coal Bearing lands in village Govindpur and Armo within the Nawadah Police Station in the district of Giridih. Thereafter, on 17.8.1979 and 1.9.1979 notification under Section 7(1) of the sa...
Shiv NaraIn Mishra and ors. Vs. Sanichar Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR145(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioners have prayed to hold the order dated 18.5.2004 bad in law. By the impugned order, the learned Court below has held that he has got no jurisdiction to decide Relief No. (a) as prayed for by the plaintiff in paragraph 15 of the plaint. The plaint has been annexure as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In Paragraph 15(a) of the plaint, the following reliefs have been prayed :'(a) On adjudication it be declared that the plaintiff has valid right, title, interest and possession over the suit lands described in Schedule 'A' of the plaint.(b) It be further declared that the registered sale deed No. 4374, dated 15.5.1967 executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of the defendants No. 2 and 3 for the suit land is illegal, invalid in operative, null and void and not binding on the plaintiff.'2. By the impugned order the learned Court below has held that the suit will proceed only with respect to the Relief No. (b), as he has got no jurisdi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »