Jharkhand Court March 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.
Sutlej Construction Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR445(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Reference may be made to the order dated 23.2.2005, which reads as under :'Reference may be made to the order dated 16.2.2005, which reads as under :'No counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents in spite of time allowed to the respondents.Learned JC to Advocate General prays for more time for filing counter-affidavit.As prayed for, one week's time is allowed for filing counter affidavit. Let this case be listed on 23.2.2005. If by that time, counter-affidavit is not filed then the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Ranchi (respondent No. 2) shall appear in person before this Court.'Today neither the counter affidavit has been filed nor the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Ranchi appeared in person.Put up this case on 2nd March, 2005. On that day the Chief Engineer,Water Resources Department, Ranchi shall appear in person and file show-cause as to why a proceeding for contempt be not initiated against him for violating the order dated ...
Hegal Hembram Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR443(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application since a very serious question was raised by the petitioner that without issuing any notice the impugned order was passed by the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, this Court, on 17.1.2005, passed the following order :'Heard in part.Put up this case on 24.1.2005. In the meantime, standing counsel No. 1 is directed to send FAX to the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division for production of record of Kolhan Title Appeal No. 89 of 1995 disposed of on 12.1.1998.SC.I. is also directed to inform the office of the Commissioner for production of the records. Let a copy of this order be handed over to SC.I for needful.'2. When the record was not produced, this court passed order on 23.2.2005 directing the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, to personally appear and file show cause why a contempt proceeding be not initiated against her.3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division has appeared ...
Rungta Projects Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand Through the Chief Secretar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR617(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the instant application under Section 11(6)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner has prayed for appointment of an arbitrator in relation to disputes and differences which are arisen between the petitioner and the respondents in connection with the contract for a work of construction of roads and bridges in Kisko Block in the district of Lohardaga.2. In pursuance of the Contract (Package No. 51) petitioner was allotted work by the Rural Engineering Organisation of the State Government for the construction of roads and bridges in Kisko and other places falling under Lohardaga and Gumla Districts.3. Petitioner's case is that the work was carried out but due to various adverse circumstances petitioner was constrained to stop the work. Such adverse circumstances had arisen due to terrorist/militant activities and problems created by local villagers etc. Petitioner thereafter approached the respondents for estimating the losses incurred and for...
Ashok Mehta and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR459(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.4.2004, passed in Criminal Revision No. 119 of 2003 whereby and where under learned Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur affirmed the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate passed in C/1 Case No. 317 of 1993 dated 17.4.2003.2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that respondent No. 2 filed a complaint case before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur on 30.9.1993 relating to the occurrence alleged to have taken place on 29.9.1993. The petitioner, Ashok Mehta was at the relevant point of time posted as Executive Director (Administration) but he has now retired and petitioner No. 2, Arun Narayan Singh, was holding the post of General Manager, Town division, TISCO. Learned Magistrate examined the complainant on S.A. on 30.9.1993 and held enquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and recorded statement of witnesses on the basis of which he ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›