Jharkhand Court January 2007 Judgments
Raj Kumar Bhuian, Vs. the State of Bihar (Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-25-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1015
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. The appellants were tried and convicted in Sessions Trial No. 205 of 1999 by the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj, for the offences under Sections 304/34, 341, 504, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 304/34 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 307/34 IPC besides simple imprisonment for one month for each of the offences under Sections 341 and 504 of the Indian penal Code. Feeling aggrieved the appellants have preferred this appeal.Learned Counsel for the appellants informs that during the pendency of the appeal, appellant No. 3 Bisheshwar Bhuian was granted bail by order dated 25.6.2002, but subsequently he has died. No certificate of death or any report from the concerned police station has been received in this regard and as such, no order has been passed for abatement of the appeal against the said appellant No. 3 herein. 2. The case relates to the homicidal ...
Tag this Judgment!Jaigy Oraon @ Jatru Oraon and anr. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-25-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ719; [2007(3)JCR543(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard.2. Petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 27.2.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Lohardaga in Compensation Case No. 255 of 2000 by which the learned claims tribunal allowed the petition dated 17.12.2005 filed by the New India Assurance Company and directed the petitioners to implead the owner and insurer of the scooter, on which the petitioners' son was travelling as pillion rider as opposite parties in the compensation case.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that charge-sheet has been submitted only against the driver of the offending truck bearing registration No. BR 14G 1711, the owner and the insurer whereof are already parties in the case. He further submitted that if the impugned order is allowed to stand, it will cause unnecessary delay in disposal of the compensation case which has been filed by the petitioners for claim against death of their son. He lastly submitt...
Tag this Judgment!Pranip Kumar Roy and anr. Vs. Tata Iron and Steel Company (Tisco)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-24-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR837; [2007(1)JCR593(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 28.8.2004 passed by 2nd Additional Munsif at Jamshedpur in Execution Case No. 28 of 1998 whereby he has allowed the application filed by the respondent-decree holder for substitution of legal representatives in place of the deceased judgment-debtor.2. The facts of the lie in a narrow compass:Respondent-Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. (in short Decree Holder) obtained a decree against the father of the petitioner in Title Suit No. 171 of 1980. During pendency of the suit, petitioners' father died and the mother of the petitioners was substituted. The suit was decreed on 20.2.1989. Mother of the petitioners however, died on 13.10.1996. After the death of defendant-Judgment debtor respondent-decree holder filed execution case in 1998 being Execution Case No. 28 of 1998 against the deceased mother of the petitioners. The execution case remained pending for a long time. I...
Tag this Judgment!Nagendra Sah Vs. Bihar State Cooperative Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-24-2007
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR595(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties and with their consent this appeal is disposed of at the admission stage itself.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.6.2006 passed in CWJC No. 335/1998R whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging his dismissal from service, has been dismissed.3. It appears that in Lohardaga branch of State Cooperative Land Development Bank a huge amount by way of loan given to different persons, was lying due and the said loan amount could not be realized. On 25.10.1996 the appellant was posted as Branch Manager in Lohardaga Branch of the said Bank. Although there was no condition put in the order of posting of the appellant but the respondent-Bank's case is that the appellant was posted there for the purpose of taking all endeavours for realization of the loan amount. Respondents' further case was that in between 1995 to 1998 the appellant was posted as Branch Manager in Lohardaga Branch and during that period al...
Tag this Judgment!Nathuni Mistry Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-24-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR871; [2007(2)JCR99(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (shortly 'the Act') challenging the judgment and award passed by Subordinate Judge-II, Daltonganj, Palamau as Land Acquisition Judge in Land Acquisition Case No. 10/96 whereby he has dismissed the Reference case under Section 18 of the Act and held that the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is just and reasonable.2. It appears that the Reference Case before the Land Acquisition Judge was valued by the appellant at Rs. 26 lacs whereas the instant appeal has been valued at Rs. 25,78,909=95 paise. The office calculated the court fee amount on the basis of the valuation of the appeal put by the appellant. The matter was then placed before the Registrar General before whom the appellant submitted that court fee amount should not be assessed in terms of Article 1 of Schedule II of the Court Fees Act, rather, it should be governed by Article 9 of Schedule II ...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Maqusood Alam and ors. Vs. Seikh Karu and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-24-2007
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR4(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the plaintiffs-petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 25.6.2004 passed by the learned 4th Additional District Judge, Godda in Title Appeal No. 13 of 2003 whereby he has allowed the petition filed by the intervenor for impleading him as party-defendant.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:Plaintiffs filed suit for partition being Title (Partition) Suit No. 32/92 for preparation of preliminary decree of partition to the extent of 12 annas share in the suit property. Plaintiffs' case is that Sk. Dayali Mandal and Sk. Marsalli Mandal, S/o late Kasim Ali Mandal of village Garhi held and possessed the suit property, which were recorded in the names of the aforesaid two brothers acquiring joint cultivating possession having equal share therein. Sk. Marsalli Mandal died leaving his widow, Bibi Jhako and a son Seikh Salamat as his heirs who inherited his interest in the...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Smt. Kamini Barnwal Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-24-2007
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR66(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J. 1. Heard the parties for final disposal for the writ petition.2. Petitioner's only grievance is that respondent No. 3, who is junior to her, has been posted as Incharge and has been made Drawing and Disbursing Officer at Primary Health Centre, Ormanjhi, Ranchi vide Notification dated 11.7.7.2006 (Annexure-2) ignoring the Circular No. 1656 dated 27.8.1987 (Annexure-6).3. Mr. Sumit Gagodia, 'appearing for respondent No. 2, submitted that in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 due to typographical mistake, respondent No. 3 has been mentioned. He submitted that several complaints were received against the petitioner and therefore, respondent No. 3 was made Incharge/ Drawing and Disbursing Officer.4. In reply Mr. Prasad pointed out that after respondent No. 3 was made In-charge/Drawing and Disbursing Officer by the said Notification dated 11.7.2006, he started making complaints against the petitioner relating to earlier periods, though no such co...
Tag this Judgment!Sarla Singh and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-24-2007
Reported in: 2007ACJ2464
M.Y. Eqbal and D.K. Sinha, JJ.1. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and with their consent this appeal is disposed of at the admission stage.2. The claimants are the appellants. They have preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad in Compensation (MV) Claim No. 12 of 2003.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.4. The deceased Inderdeo Singh aged about 46 years was employed in Eastern Coalfields Limited (ECL) as General Manager. On 23.10.2002 at about 8.15 a.m.,the deceased along with co-workers was going to Barmuri open cast project by the scooter bearing No. WB 38-D 2160. When he reached near the railway siding a dumper bearing registration No. BR 17-G 0653 dashed Inderdeo Singh and barged into a nearby house, breaking the wall and the deceased died on the spot.5. The claimants-appellants, who are the widow and the children claimed compensation of Rs. 40,00,000 and the claim case was contested ...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sumitra Mahto and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1347
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act is directed against the judgment nd award passed by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur in Compensation case No. 53/200 whereby he has awarded compensation of Rs. 2,24,000/- and directed the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the said amount.2. The only question that falls for consideration in this appeal is as to whether in a case where the deceased was traveling in a goods vehicle along with his goods and met with an accident before the Amendment Act, 1994 came into force, the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation.3. Mr. G.C. Jha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant Insurance Company submitted that Motor Vehicles Act was amended in 1994 with effect from 14.11.1994 by which in case of death of a person traveling in a goods carrying vehicle with his goods, the Insurance Company shall be held liable. Since the accident took place before the amendment came into forc...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Steel Ltd. and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1153; [2007(2)JCR180(Jhr)]; (2007)7VST109(Jharkh)
Permod Kohli, J.1. Common challenge is made to Notification No. S.O.201 dated 30th March, 2006, issued under Section 7(3)(b) of' the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, whereby and whereunder, Notification Nos. S.O.478 dated 22nd December, 1995, S.O.57 dated 2nd March, 2000, S.O.479 dated 22nd December, 1995 and S.O.58 dated 2ndMarch, 2000 have been withdrawn. A further, challenge is to another Notification No. S.O.202 dated 30th March, 2006, issued under Section 8(5)(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, whereby, Notification No. S.O.481 dated 22nd December, 2005 has been withdrawn. Apart from challenging the aforementioned notifications, constitutional validity of the provisions of Section 95(3)(ii) and Section 96(3) of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 is also questioned. In view of the commonality of the grounds of challenge, all these writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. All the petitioners herein have established their industrial uni...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »