Jharkhand Court November 2006 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.
Kameshwar Yadav and Gango Bhokta Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR567(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Both the appeals arising of the same judgment of conviction, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellants of both the appeals have preferred these appeals against the judgment and order dated 12.8.2002 and 13.8.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Fast Track Court No. 2, Deoghar in Sessions Trial No. 109 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the appellant, namely. Kameshwar Yadav of Cr. Appeal No. 493 of 2002 has been convicted under Sections 376/511/109 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years and 6 months and fine of Rs. 300/- in default of fine further R.I. for one month and the appellant, namely, Gango Bhokta of Cr. Appeal No. 510 of 2002 has been convicted under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of fine further R.I. for one month.3. Brief facts leading to these appeals are Uat in the evenin...
Farid Mian Vs. Central Coal Fields Ltd. Through Its General Manager (P ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR165(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J. 1. Petitioner has come to this Court disputing his date of birth which is admittedly recorded as 4th March, 1947 in the service record maintained by the Respondent-Company. The only ground for disputing the date of birth is that the date of birth of his elder brother is recorded as 23rd October, 1953 in the service record with the same Company. It is, accordingly, stated that the elder brother cannot be younger than the petitioner. It is stated that petitioner had earlier approached the Respondents in the year 1987 but no action was taken. In the counter-affidavit filed, the Respondent-Company has taken a categorical stand that petitioner's date of birth as initially recorded, is being taken into consideration for his superannuation and the service record has not been interpolated or tampered within any manner. There is no allegation on the part of the petitioner also that the Service record has been interpolated in any manner, however, there is one document i.e. ...
Bhuneshwar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR169(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner is seeking a direction for quashing the notification dated 29th July, 2005 as contained in Memo No. 971 issued by the respondent No. 4, whereunder applications have been invited from such of the Class IV and Class III employees, who were in service before 1.8.1985 and had completed 240 days of continuous engagement for consideration for their regularization. Allegedly, petitioner was in service/engagement as a daily rated worker against the vacant sanctioned post with effect from 10th November, 1984 to 23rd September, 1988. It is stated that he served during this period continuously without any break and is entitled to be considered for regularisation in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court reported in the case of Secretary, State of Karanataka and Ors. v. Ulma Devi (3) and Ors. reported in : (2006)IILLJ722SC .2. The issue regarding right of regularisation has been finally set at rest by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary. State of Kar...
Tinplate Company of India Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR278(Jhr)]; (2007)IIILLJ192Jhar
Permod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner is a Company incorporated under Indian Companies Act, 1956. The company had statutory obligation to contribute towards Employees State Insurance Scheme under the ESI Act. It is alleged that Company has provided its own medicare and has adequate infrastructure and thus Company is not liable to contribute towards the ESI fund for its employees, 1 Company, accordingly, applied to the State Government for grant of exemption from contribution vide communication dated February 18, 2005. Exemption was granted to the petitioner Company in respect to contribution for 1 the period October 1, 1996 to September 30, 1997 and from October 1, 1997 to November 14, 2000 subject to certain conditions. Since there was no exemption thereafter, ESI raised a demand of Rs. 10630764/- (Rupees One Crore Six Lakhs Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred sixty four only) covering the period November 15, 2000 to December 31, 2004. It is admitted case of the parties that petitioner had applied ...
Radhey Biscuits Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-18-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR446(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, learned S.C. III appears for the Respondents. She seeks one week time to file counter affidavit.2. Normally this Court is not inclined to stay the revenue, however, in the present case there is substantial material on record to suggest payment of the entire licence fee as per details contained in Annexure-7 and this is the case of the petitioner that entire amount has been paid. In view of these circumstances, I am inclined to pass the interim direction.3. List this matter on 29th of December, at the joint request of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.4. In the meanwhile, no recovery shall be effected from the petitioner in respect to the licence fee for Group I for the financial year 2006-2007. This order is, however, subject to an undertaking to be filed by the petition before the Registrar of this Court, undertaking to pay the licence fee in the event petitioner fails in the writ application. Let the undertaking be filed...
Larsen and Toubro Limited Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR694; [2007(1)JCR542(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the demand notice dated 4.3.2006 relating to assessment year 1991-92 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, commercial Taxes, Urban Circle, Jamshedpur, pursuant to the order dated 27.2.2006 passed under the provision of Section 19(2) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and further for quashing the entire proceedings of reopening of the assessment proceedings on the basis of audit objection in respect of assessment which was completed in 1996.2. The petitioner's case, inter alia, is that for the assessment year 1991-92, the petitioner filed returns under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 as well as Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and furnished all documents, books of accounts, turnover, etc before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jamshedpur. The assessment proceeding relating to the Bihar Finance Act was completed and the...
Mangalam Minerals and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anjaneya Ispat Ltd.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR457(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the instant application under Section 439(A) of Indian Companies Act, 1956, the petitioner claiming himself to be the creditor prayed for winding up of the respondent-Company on the ground of nonpayment of dues. The petitioner- M/s. Mangalam Minerals and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. is a limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act and carries on. business of supply of coal and coke. The petitioner's case is that the respondent-Company M/s. Anjaneya Ispat Ltd., Adityapur, Jamshedpur, accepted the offer of the petitioner-Company to purchase coke through its associates having its work at Dhanbad. It is alleged that the respondent-Company placed various purchase orders upon the petitioner-Company from time-to-time and the petitioner agreed to supply coal/coke at the rate mentioned in the purchase order and shipment of coal/coke was arranged by the petitioner-Company through M/s. G.N. Coke ., Merah, Chirkunda, Dhanbad. It is alleged that during the period 23.12...
Raghwendra Mishra Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR170(Jhr)]
Permod Kohli, J. 1. Petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant-cum-Typist on 20th of December, 1985. The service of the petitioner came to be terminated alongwith two others on 29th of May, 1986 on the ground of their appointment, being illegal, having been made without any selection. It appears that on some representation, the termination of the petitioner and others was kept in abeyance by order dated 21st June, 1986 and have continued to perform their duties. Their pay-scale was revised. While performing their duties, petitioner and others approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1026 of 1998 and claimed for redesignation on a higher post of Typist of Secretariat level/This writ petition came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 16th August, 1999 with the following observations:22. In the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner having appointed against a post of Assistant-cum-Typist in the then scale of 580-860/-, there was no occasion for the authorities to provide them with the...
Mihijam Vanaspati Ltd. Vs. the State of Jharkhand,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR557(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In these writ application the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondents to issue the statutory Form 'Cha' to which petitioner is entitled in the capacity of an exempted Unit under the Notification No. S.O.96 dated 4.4.1994 for the sales made by it during the period 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 as the petitioner has already paid the applicable TOT and surcharge over such sale.2. Petitioner's case is that it is a registered Dealer under the provisions of the Bihar Finance Act as well as Central Sales Tax Act. under the Deoghar Circle, Deoghar. Petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of vegetable and refined edible oil. Petitioner having started the production on 30.3.1995 was eligible for sales tax exemption for the period of 10 years as per the Industrial Incentive Policy of 1993 and S.O. 96 dated 4.4.1994 issued under the provisions of Bihar Finance Act, 1981. Vide order dated 29.9.1995 petitioner Unit was granted exemption from sales-tax for the period...
Smt. Uma Mishra and ors. Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR408(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This application filed by the petitioner decree holder is directed against the order dated 21.2.2006 passed by Munsif-I, Dhanbad whereby he has allowed the objection petition filed by the judgment-debtor under Section 47 of the CPC and dismissed the execution case being Execution Case No. 21/05 holding that Execution case being barred by limitation is not maintainable.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner filed Title Suit No. 5/96 in the Court of Munsif, Dhanbad for declaration that plaintiff is entitled to appointment of his sons in the defendant/Company as land looser under rehabilitation scheme. The aforesaid suit was decreed by Munsif-I, Dhanbad against the respondent-Bharat Coking Coal Limited and direction was is, sued for giving employment to at least one son of the plaintiff. Defendant-respondent, aggrieved by the said Judgment dated 11.10.2002 filed Title Appeal, which was ; eventually dismissed by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »