Jharkhand Court June 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.
Rajmata Gyani Maharani and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-27-2005
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR336(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to correctly prepare their Compensation Assessment Roll and to pay ad interim compensation in accordance with the provisions of Bihar Land Reforms Act and Rules framed thereunder.2. The petitioners' main grievance is that in spite of several orders of this Court in different legal proceedings, the compensation in respect of the mines and minerals which were given in leases by them, has not been determined and ad interim compensation has not been paid to them. The further grievance is that the amount of compensation mentioned in the order dated 9.11.1997 passed by the Additional Compensation Officer, Dhanbad as contained in Annexure-5 is arbitrary and wholly without any basis. In Annexure-II of the said Annexure-5, total income of mines and minerals has been shown as Rs. 61,156.97 P and the amount of compensation payable as Rs. 2,44,631.88P or Rs. 3,00,000/-, said to have been...
Santu Prasad Das and anr. Vs. Eastern Coal Field Limited and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-25-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar24; 2005(3)BLJR1709; [2005(3)JCR416(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. Both the appeal (F.A. No. 328 of 1989 (P) and F.A. No. 442 of 1989) have arisen out of the judgment and decree dated 15.5.1989 passed in Money Suit No. 40 of 1987 whereby and whereby the learned Subordinate Judge I, Deoghar dismissed the suit. Money Suit No. 40 of 1987 was filed for recovery of Rs. 14,94,465.65 paise due to non-payment of bills in respect of agreement Nos. 4 and 7 of 1978 in respect of Chitra Colliery and agreement Nos. 5 and 6 of 1982 in respect of Lalmatia Colliery and interest was also claimed at the rate of 12% per annum together with temporary injunction restraining defendant No. 7, from getting any certificate of attachment for the alleged arrears with the plaintiff and also for mandatory injunction directing the defendant Nos. 1 to 6 to pay the defendant No. 7 the arrears as per agreement.2. The case of the plaintiffs in brief is that plaintiff No. 1 Santu Prasad Das took contract work for construction of office building and N.H.S. quar...
Jai Kishun Choudhary and ors. Vs. Ramdeo Choudhary
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1810; [2005(3)JCR188(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This second appeal, at the instant of the appellants, is directed against the judgment dated 13.6.1990 and decree dated 25.6.1990 passed in Title Appeal No. 35/89, whereby and whereunder the learned 6th Additional District Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj set-aside the judgment and decree dated 25.5.1989 passed by Sub-Judge 1st, Palamau at Daltonganj decreeing Title Suit No. 60/82.2. Appellants were plaintiffs in the lower Court and the case of the plaintiffs-appellants is that they filed Title Suit No. 60/82 in the Court of Sub-Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj against defendant-respondent praying therein for declaration of title and confirmation of possession over the suit lands measuring 2.79 acres of land appertaining to Khata No. 82, plot Nos. 308 and 310 of village Purnadih, P.S. Daltonganj, fully described in Schedules A to C of the plaint. Further case of the plaintiffs-appellants is that the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 are the recorded raiyat of village Purnadih an...
Maini @ Manager Das Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)BLJR1571
Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 5.6.1992, in Sessions Case No. 342 of 1990, whereby the learned trial Court convicted the appellant for committing the offences under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo R1 for a period of 7 years. The other co-accused, Bhakti Darbey, who was also tried along with the appellant, was however acquitted by the Court below.2. The prosecution story, in short, is that in the night of 19.8.1987 at about 8 p.m. seven to eight persons, suddenly entered into the courtyard of the informant, Sugia Devi (PW 2) while the informant and her daughter were lying on their cot after night meal. It is stated that four persons came near the informant and asked for money. The informant stated that one of the miscreants was known to her prior to the occurrence and his name was Maini Das (appellant), and it was he who had asked for money. The informant replied that she had no money. At this, the appellant s...
Vikas Kumar Vs. Nikhil Mazumdar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1740; [2005(4)JCR124(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. This civil revision application is against the order dated 8.2.2005 passed in Title Eviction Suit No. 11/04 passed by the Munsif, 1st, Dhanbad refusing leave to contest the suit by the defendant-petitioner. The plaintiff-opposite party has filed the said suit for eviction under the provision of Section 11(1)(e) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982. The plaintiffs case was that there was a fixed period of tenancy which expired on 31.12.2003 and as such on the ground of expiry of the said period the tenant-defendant is liable to be evicted. On getting the summons the defendant-opposite party appeared and as required under the provisions of Section 14(4) of the said Act, filed a petition stating the ground on which he sought to contest the suit praying leave of the Court below. By the impugned order the said application has been rejected. From perusal of the said petition seeking leave, which has been enclosed as Annexure 3, it appears...
Ghishu Sk. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1733; [2005(4)JCR225(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This criminal miscellaneous application along with A.B.A. No. 276 of 2005 are directed against the impugned order dated 16.9.2004 by which the learned Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 16.9.2004 and also for grant of anticipatory bail.2. Facts leading to filing of the application as well as the anticipatory bail application are that the informant lodged and FIR on 8.8.2002 in the evening at 6 to 7 p.m. that, 12 to 13 persons including this petitioner Ghishu Sk. armed with deadly weapons came inside her house after breaking the door and ordered to cut Bhola into pieces in the field of cane and to outrage the modesty of the female. On this the remaining culprits caught Bholi Sk. and Alam Sk. assaulted her with butt of pistol and she fell down whereupon Alam Sk. made attempt to commit rape on her but Bhola Sk. and Amar Farque saved her. Again this petitioner Ghishu Sk. abused. Thereafter Isrfil Sk. was given a blow of dagg...
Niranjan Prasad Mandal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-22-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR424a(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order contained in Memo No. 651, dated 16th may, 2005, so far as it relates to petitioner, whereby and whereunder, the services of petitioner has been allocated to the Bihar Cadre under the Co-operative Department. The aforesaid order has been issued under Section 72(2) of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000.2. The only grievance made by. the petitioner is that he had given his option for the State of Jharkhand and is a permanent resident of the State but that cannot be a ground to claim his allocation for State of Jharkhand. The Central Government, on the recommendation of an Advisory Committee has finalized the Cadre. The said Committee not only took into consideration the objections filed by one or other, but also noticed the guidelines issued by the Central Government relating to allocation of Cadre.3. The other ground taken by the counsel for the petitioner is that the person junior to ...
Kaleshwar Ram Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-22-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR424(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order contained in Memo No. 651, dated 16th May, 2005, so far as it relates to petitioner, whereby and whereunder, he has been allocated the Bihar Cadre under the Cooperative Department. The aforesaid order has been issued under Section 72(2) of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000.2. According to the petitioner, he belongs to Scheduled Caste, but in the tentative list he having been wrongly shown as Scheduled Tribe, his name has been recommended and he has been allocated the Bihar Cadre.3. Though such submission has been made, but from the record, as contained in letter No. 1258 dated 17th May, 2004, it appears that the Government of Bihar while forwarded the details to the Deputy Secretary, Cooperative Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi indicated therein that the petitioner claims to be a Scheduled Caste with regard to which the Government of Jharkhand had no objection. Taking into consideration...
La Opala R.G. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-22-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR328(Jhr)]
Altamas Kabir, CJ.1. This writ application involves 'the interpretation of a notification dated 22nd June, 2001, issued by the State of Jharkhand in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (b) of Sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, which reads as under :'NOTIFICATIONThe 22nd June, 2001S.O. 25, dated the 25th June, 2001.--In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (b) of Sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (Act 74 of 1958) the Governor of Jharkhand is pleased to direct that tax payable under Sub-section (1) or (2) of Section 8 of the said Act in respect of sale of all types of glass and glass sheets in the course of inter-State sale or commerce from any place of business in the State of Jharkhand shall be calculated at the rate of three per centum and no statutory form in this regard shall be required.2. This notification shall come into force with effect from 16th June, 2001.By the order of Governorof JharkhandA. TiwariAddl. Se...
Sadhana Agrawal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-22-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR217]; [2005(3)JCR517(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter No. RDOT/8-3/AK-210/59, dated 30th April, 2003 as contained in Annexure-6 whereby the respondent No. 5 has asked the petitioner and other claimants to obtain succession certificate for payment of D.C.R.G/C.G.E.G.I.S.- 80/Leave Encashment and Family Pension stating that the payment will be made as soon as the succession certificate along with claims are received in the office. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the letter No. RDOT/8-3/AK-210/69, dated 16th June, 2003 reminding the petitioner for submission of succession certificate in order to enable the office to settle the claims. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay the entire death-cum-retiral benefits to the petitioner with interest and a direction to produce the original nomination papers and service record/book kept in the custody of the Head of the Department.2. The petitioner's case i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »