Jharkhand Court February 2007 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.
Poly Art Industries (P) Ltd. Through Its Director and anr. Vs. State o ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR590(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 20.11.2006 whereby the distress warrant and the warrant of attachment have been issued against the petitioner No. 2 in Certificate Case No. 01 (B.S.F.C.) of 2006-07 (Annexure 6) and also for quashing the distress warrant issued against the petitioner No. 2 by order dated 26.6.2004 in Certificate Case No. 11/1999-2000 11/1999-2000 (Annexure 9). The petitioners have also sought declaration that the certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No. 01 (B.S.F.C.) of 2006-07 (Annexure 6) is void ab initio and for issuing notice to Sri Krishnanand Prasad, District Certificate Officer (respondent No. 3) for showing total disregard for the rule of law and the judicial precedents.2. The petitioner's case is that the Company set up an industrial unit at Ranchi in 1986-87 for manufacturing plastic household items (buckets etc.) The term loan for land-building, plant and machinery was given by ...
Reshmi KewtaIn Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-13-2007
Reported in: II(2007)DMC713
ORDERD.P. Singh, J.1. The present appeal has been preferred by the complainant of P.C.R. Case No. 11 of 1990 against the judgment and order of acquittal by which the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent from charge under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1994 by order dated 8th September, 1994.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the complainant Reshmi Kewtain was married with respondent Shivlal Kewat for nearby six years when she was thrown out of the matrimonial house for non-fulfilment of dowry demands. She further asserted that on 28.2.1990 the respondent married with another lady Binda Kewtain. The complainant brought a complaint case against the respondent and the nine others on 9.4.1990. The learned CJM after inquiry took cognizance against the respondent only. The Trial Court, SDJM Sahibganj after examining witnesses charged the respondent under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondent pleaded innocence, however he...
Bihar State Finance Corporation Employees' Federation Vs. Bihar State ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-12-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1358; [2007(4)JCR446(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. The parties were heard at length for final disposal of the writ petition on 25.1.2007 when the order was reserved and prayer for interim relief was refused.2. Petitioner claims to be an Association of the employees of Bihar State Financial Corporation (BSFC), working within the State of Jharkhand. According to the petitioner, in view of the resolutions of BSFC, the decision of the Government of Bihar dated 24.3.2005 (Annexure-1) to enhance the age of superannuation of State Government employees from 58 to 60 years, has become applicable to the members of petitioner also and there is no need to get sanction of the State Government to amend Regulation 19 (i) of the Bihar State Financial Corporation (Staff) Regulation, 1965 (the Regulation for short), for this purpose.3. By way of Amendment Petition, (I.A. No. 244 of 2007), petitioner has challenged the decision of the State of Bihar, communicated under Memo No. 255 dated 12.1.2007 refusing sanction to the resolutions ...
Protima Moyee Sadhu Khan Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-12-2007
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR248(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J. 1. Heard.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No. 6 directly moved the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Rajmahal (for short 'the D.C.L.R.') for mutation who by order dated 11.7.1997 (Annexure 7) recommended her case for mutation, though petitioner's application for mutation was pending before the Circle Officer, Rajmahal, who was the competent authority.3. The case of the private respondents and the State is that if the Circle Officer refuses to entertain the petition for mutation, the D.C.L.R. was competent to entertain and pass orders on the same.4. In reply, it is submitted that respondent No. 6 has not brought on record any document to show that the Circle Officer, in fact, refused to entertain the petition of respondent No. 6.5. It is the admitted position that a suit being Title Suit No. 7 of 1997 is pending in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Rajmahal between the parties with regard to the land in question.6. In that view of the matter, i...
Vijay Mandal Vs. Raghunath Mandal and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-12-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR456(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the complainant Vijay Mandal against the judgment and order dated 30.4.1992 by which the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Godda has acquitted the respondents from charges under Sections 307/324/325/149 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 31 of 1987.2. This appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that the learned trial Court has not considered the ocular evidence and discarded the consistent statements of injured persons. According to this memo of appeal, the trial Court has further failed to appreciate that the injured persons were hospitalised for long period.3. This appeal was admitted on 19.8.1992 with notice to the respondents, who have appeared before the trial Court and executed bonds. However, when the appeal was called for final disposal, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant. Learned A.P.P. appeared for the State and the respondents were also present through their counsel, Mr. Rajeeva Sharma.4. Lea...
Hindustan Steelworks Constructions Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-09-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Jhar95; IV(2007)BC302; 2007(2)CTLJ111(Jhar); [2007(4)JCR445(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter No. 478 dated 12.8.2006, issued under the signature of the Executive Engineer, Rural Development Special Division, Simdega, whereby the agreement entered into between the petitioner and the concerned department by virtue of Agreement No. 1F-2 of 2003-04 has been sought to be rescinded. The petitioner has further sought direction on the respondents not to encash the Bank Guarantee being B.G. No. 36/20 dated 4.6.2003 issued by the State Bank of India, Middleton Street Branch, Kolkata to the extent of Rs. 75.60 lakhs. It has been, inter alia, stated that on the basis of a clause for termination of the contract on the breach of the terms a letter was issued by the Executive Engineer on 10.4.2006 asking the petitioner to show cause as to why the agreement shall not be terminated and action, as per the provisions of the agreement, be not taken against it. The petitioner submitted its repl...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vijay Kumar Adukia and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1097
1. In all these appeals, since common question of law and facts are involved, they have been heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. These appeals have been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna whereby the tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and further allowed cross objection filed by the respondent-assessee.3. For better appreciation of the fact of the case, first of all we shall take up Tax appeal No. 9/02. Respondent-Assessee derives income from dealing in vegetable oil and edible oil etc. Respondent also derives income from commission on sale of edible oil received from various manufacturers of States other than erstwhile Bihar. Respondent used to issue Form F for all such goods to the consignor and on the basis of this Form F, the consignor used to get rebate from sales tax on the consignment sale in his own State. The allegation against the resp...
Mangal Tudu and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1313
1. All the appellants stand convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 and 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and three years respectively, by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 121 of 1993. However, both the Sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the deceased Munna Danial used to serve in Kuruwa Post Office within Dumka Muffasil in the town of Dumka. According to the prosecution case, the deceased was going to attend his duty in the morning of 6.8.1992 when all the appellants named above overpowered him outside the village- Ghashipur and assaulted him with sharp cutting weapons resulting in his death on the spot. Informant Suleman Murmu as P.W. 4 and P.W. 3 Ram Murmu have seen the occurrence in broad day light to inform P.W.1 Subhashini Hembram, mother of the deceased. According to the informant, the deceased was carrying Rs. 1000/- in cash...
Deepak Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2007
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR85(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notification vide Memo No 3948, dated 30th December, 2006, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of Assistant Engineer, MESO Area, Ranchi to the post of Assistant Engineer, MESO Area, Latehar. He has also prayed for quashing the notification vide Memo No. 3947, dated 30th December, 2006, whereby respondent No. 6 has been transferred as Assistant Engineer, MESO Area, Ranchi.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been transferred at the instance of the Minister, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, who has got no concern with the petitioner's department, and that the order of transfer has not been issued in accordance with law.3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 stating inter alia, that the decision for transfer of the petitioner was taken by the concerned Establishment Committee, taking i...
Smt. S. Mehta Vs. the Steel Authority of India Ltd. Through Its Chairm ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR592(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard.2. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 6.10.2006 (Annexure 2), passed by respondent No. 5, in case No. A/E, 112/06, directing her to remove unauthorised construction over 2206 sq.ft. of the leased land.The parties agreed that Section 4A in the said order is a typographical mistake for Section 5A.3. Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, on being asked, admitted that petitioner has made constructions over the leased premises. However, it was submitted that the same was not unauthorised, as per the lease agreement.It was further submitted that copy of the complaint/report, on the basis of which the said case was started, was not supplied to the petitioner; that the said order is non-speaking order; and that the Estate Officer (respondent No. 5) was not appointed in accordance with law and therefore he had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order.4. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, submitted that in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »