Jharkhand Court February 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.
Sadhni Saha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR1(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the parties.2. This letter patent appeal is directed against the order dated 30.8.2005 passed in WPS No. 3239/05 whereby- the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the appellant is not entitled to family pension. For better appreciation, the impugned order dated 30.8.2005 passed by learned Single Judge is' quoted herein below :This writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction upon the respondents to pay her family pension. From the pleadings made by the petitioner, it appears that her husband Blpad Waran Saha was appointed as a Teacher in Lagdum Middle School, Pakuria Circle on 13th of September, 1971 from where he was transferred to one Primary School, Madgam Circle, Pakuria. He died in harness on 22nd of March, 1974. After about 30 years, the petitioner moved before this Court for payment of family pension. Though, no explanation for delay has been given, learned counsel submits that in the matter of family pension delay ...
Kanta Ram Vs. Sukhdeo Narayan and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar53; [2006(2)JCR85(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment of affirmance passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Title Appeal No. 20/2001 affirming the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court passed in Title Suit No. 140/91.2. The plaintiff filed the said suit claiming a decree for specific performance. The plaintiffs case is that the land measuring 3.30 acres of plot No. 1449, 1450 and 1455 appertaining to Khata No. 106 of village Kokar, P.S. Sadar, District, Ranchi belong to the defendants and in the month of January, 1985 the defendants approached the plaintiff requesting him to purchase the said land. The plaintiff on their request agreed to purchase the same for a consideration amount of Rs. 50.000/-, The parties thereafter entered into an agreement of sale on 17.1.1985. The plaintiff also paid Rs. 18.600/- as an advance towards the said consideration amount. The defendants further took Rs. 2000/- at the time of need and then...
Lakhan Sah and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2524; [2006(2)JCR126(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The appellants, Lakhan Sah, Jamuna Sah and Jichhu Sah were arrayed as A2, A3 and A4 respectively along with Ram Bilash Sah, who was arrayed as Al, before the 7th Addl. Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 470 of 1984/058 of 1988. All the appellants along with Ram Bilash Sah were tried under Section 364 of the IPC; The trial Judge, finding the 1st accused. Ram Bilash Sah not guilty, found the appellants guilty, as charged, and sentenced each one of them to imprisonment for life. The present appeal is against the said conviction and sentence,2. In this judgment the appellants will be referred as A2, A3 and A4. Ram Bilash Shah will be referred as Al for the sake of convenience.3. The case of the prosecution is as follows :PW 1, Sumi Hembrom is the wife of the deceased, Lakhi Chandra Sao. Lokhan Sah, A2 and Jamuna Sah, A3 are the step brothers of the deceased and Jichhu Sah is the nephew of the deceased. Ram Bilash Shah, who was acquitted, was the distant relative of the dece...
Budhisal Murmu Vs. Som Soren and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR36(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this second appeal, the plaintiff-appellant-appellant has sought to challenge the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below. The plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 56/73 seeking a decree declaring his right, title and interest and recovery of possession of the suit property being jamabandi No. 22 of village Jhunki, P.S. Sikaripara, district Dumka. The case of the plaintiff is that the parties are by caste Santhal and they are governed by their customary law. The suit land was recorded in the name of Matla Murmu @ Bhoju, who had one son Indira @ Barka Murmu, who died during the lifetime of his father leaving behind his widow. The wife of Barka Murmu left the house for good and later on died. Matla had one daughter, namely, Raria @ Munni Murmu. She was forcibly taken away by one Mangal Soren for marriage. They lived like wife and husband and two daughters and one son were born. Under Santhal Customary law, the heirs of the recorded tenant Matla ar...
Dasrath Mistri Vishwakarma Vs. Government of India, Through the Contro ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR89(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the registered Design No. 194824, dated 16.3.2004 (Annexure-5) whereby the design of the respondent No. 2 has been registered in the alleged contravention of the provisions of the Designs Act. It has been stated that the petitioner after much efforts had-developed a design of Tramline Sleepers for use in Underground Rail Tracks of various nining collieries. The said design was renewed by the respondent No. 1 and was valid up to January, 2013. The petitioner had further improved the design and had also applied for registration which was granted vide Annexure-3. The respondent No. 2 maliciously has combined the two earlier designs of the petitioner and got the same registered in the year 2004. The said action of the respondent No. 2 is contrary to law. When the respondent No. 1 had got registered the said design, the petitioner in protest filed a representation before the respondent No. 1 praying for cancel...
Shravan Kumar Choudhary Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board Through ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(110)FLR613]; [2006(2)JCR387(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay his retirement benefits including pension, gratuity, G.P.F. earned leave encashment, arrears of annual increment and other benefits.2. It has been stated that the Pension Payment Order has been issued as far back as on 5.5.2003 fixing the petitioner's pension and the G.P.F. amount has been sanction by letter dated 8.9.2004. Similarly his leave encashment has been sanctioned by Letter No. 14.4.05 and the other dues have also been admitted by the respondents. But in spite of the same, the payment has not be made to the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed representation dated 3.11.2004 before the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Dhanbad Electricity Supply Circle, Dhanbad, but the same has also not been heeded upon.3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the amount has been sanctioned and the same will be paid to the petitioner and hi...
Mukteshwar Mahto Vs. Ram Autar Sharma
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR468(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the writ petition.2. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 27.03.2004 passed in Confiscation Case No. 30 of 2003, by . the Divisional Forest Officer, Dhanbad and the order dated 25.07.2005 passed by the Collector, Dhanbad in Confiscation (Forest) Appeal No. 8 of 2004 and also for release of the tractor No. JH 11A 8538 and trailer No. JH 11A 8539 after proper verification of the petitioner's ownership.3. The petitioner's case is that he is the owner of the said tractor and trailer which is a commercial vehicle mainly used for carrying/transporting agricultural goods. It has been stated that on 17.11.2003 the tractor was loaded with some papal tree chiran and was seized by the forest officials. Thereafter, the said case was initiated for carrying forest produce. Show cause notice was issued to the petitioner to which lie had filed reply stating, intra...
Parbati Marandi and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3552
1. The appellants, three in number, were arrayed as A-1 to A-3 respectively before the 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka. On being tried under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, they were found guilty and each one of them was sentenced to imprisonment for life. They were also found guilty under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC for which each of them was sentenced to suffer three months' R.I.2. The allegation against the appellants in the above charge is that they, in furtherance of common intention of each of them, committed the murder of Babulal Marandi (D-1) and Chandrai Marandi (D-2) and during the course of same transaction, they also caused simple injuries to PW 7 Sumi Soren and PW 9 Somat Murmu.3. Babulal Marandi (D-1) is the husband of PW 9 Somat Marandi. Chandrai Marandi (D-2) is the elder brother of Babulal Marandi (D-1). P.W.7 Sumi Soren is the mother of the 1st appellant Parbati Marandi. The 2nd appellant Chunda Kisku is the husband of the 1st appella...
Bhuneshwar Patel Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-06-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR238(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties.2. Petitioner prays for an order, similar to the order passed by this Court in W.P. (C) 4080 of 2003 in the case of Mithu Ram on 16.8.2004.3. Mr. Atanu Banerjee, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that several trucks were seized and the Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorized Officer, Hazaribagh was directed to dispose of the interim applications for relief, by order dated 10.7.2002, passed in W.P. (C) No. 186 of 2002, but he passed final order confiscating the trucks in question. He further submitted that one of the truck owners, Mithu Ram moved this Court and the matter was remanded back for taking afresh decision on merits.4. However, Mr. Banerjee agreed that the petitioner's application for interim relief need not be decided separately, as the main confiscation case itself is to be decided on merits now.5. Mr. Pradip Modi, learned Counsel for the State submitted that apart from the petition for interim relief,...
Mrs. Salma Khatoon and anr. Vs. Kalyan Kar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-06-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR28(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs-appellants-appellants against, the judgment and decree of 3rd Additional District Judge (FTC), Jam-tara passed in Title Appeal No. 21/96/ 17/2002 dismissing the appeal. The plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration of their right, title and interest and for declaring that the orders passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner as well as Commissioner under the provisions of Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act is void, illegal and ineffective. The plaintiffs also prayed for decree of permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from evicting the plaintiffs from the suit property.2. The case of the plaintiff is that her father was a Jamabandi raiyat and he had been in possession of the suit property measuring an area of 3 1/2 decimals since 1937 which was given to the father of the plaintiff by the defendant No. 9. She claimed to have acquired title by adverse possession. Further case of the plaintiff is that...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »