Jharkhand Court March 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.
Bigal @ Biglaha Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR257(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Sole appellant Bigal @ Biglaha Mahto stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for four years, by the 1st Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 664 of 1998.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that in the afternoon of July 2, 1998, the appellant was carrying ripe jackfruits to Hatia when deceased Karma Oraon started negotiating for purchase of jack-fruits. As further stated during this negotiation, the deceased lifted a jackfruit to visualize it when it falls down on the road spoiling it. This led to an assault made by the appellant on the deceased with fist and pushing him down on the earth. According to informant, P.W. 2 Shushila Linda, her father fell down and became unconscious. Thereafter, the appellant moved away. The informant brought her father to the house after nourishing giving some water and massaging in the house, but the ...
Vig English School Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR550(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal by the writ petitioner-appellant is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.9.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of the writ petition with the consent of the parties.2. The appellant filed writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 1670 of 2006 for quashing two communications dated 11.3.2006 and 13.3.2006 issued by the Executive Magistrate, Jamshedpur relating to the dispute with regard to control and management of the appellant-School, namely, Vig English School, Chhota Govindpur, Jamshedpur. The appellant-School was established and run by the Vig Educational Cultural Society which was registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860. The School was duly affiliated with the Council for Indian School Certificate Examination (I.C.S.E.) and presently about 2000 students are reading from Class Nursery to Standard-XII.3. It appears that the above named Society was established under the Chairmanship of respondent No. 7 - Smt. Satyawati Vig, wido...
S.D. Singh Polytube Co. Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1334; [2007(3)JCR79(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. This matter has been placed before us on reference made by the learned Single Judge in terms of order dated 8.2.2007 for deciding the following issues:(i) Whether in terms of Clause 32.1.1 of the Jharkhand Industrial Policy, 2001, the Small Scale Industrial Units located within the State should be given preference in the purchases by the State Government Departments and its agencies under its control to the extent of 75% of the total orders placed in respect of any tendered item?(ii) Whether the Purchase Committee of the govt. department(s) can deviate from the said Industrial Policy of the Government in making recommendation(s) for purchases covered by the said Policy?(iii) Any other issue(s) as may be deemed proper in the circumstance of the case.2. The writ petitioners have challenged the decision of the Purchase Committee of the Drinking Water and Sanitary Department, Government of Jharkhand dated 11.10.2006 whereby the Committee recommended that if the local...
Chief Engineer of B.P.D.P./R.E.O. Vs. Scoot Wilson Kirkpatrick India P ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Jhar108; 2007(3)ARBLR106(Jhar); 2007(2)BLJR1624; [2007(3)JCR636(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. In pursuance of the order of remand by the Supreme Court, the matter has come before this Court to consider the main point urged in this appeal.2. The counsel for the appellant would submit that the order passed by the Sub Judge refusing to set aside the arbitral award was mainly on the ground that the application was filed beyond the period of limitation and since Section 5 of the Limitation Act would confer powers on Sub Judge to condone the delay, the Sub Judge ought to have exercised that power, entertained the application and set aside the order.3. Arguing contra, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent, on the strength of the decision in the case of State of Goa v. Western Builders reported in : AIR2006SC2525 , would submit that Section 5 of the Limitation Act would not apply in respect of the application under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act (hereinafter called as Act). It is contended by the counsel for the respondent that under ...
Suresh Saw Vs. Kalicharan Saw
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR351(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This application under Article 227 of Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 4.8.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, Dhanbad in Misc. Appeal No. 53 of 2004 whereby he has rejected the application filed by the petitioner-appellant under Order XLI, Rule 27 CPC and refused to allow the petitioner to adduce certified copy of the pleading of Title Suit No. 17 of 1988 by way of additional evidence.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The respondent-Kalicharan Saw filed Eviction Suit being Eviction Suit No. 17 of 1988 against one Narayan Tiwari for a decree of eviction alleging therein that the suit premises being Plot No. 367 Khata No. 217 area 7 decimals was purchased by him and was let out to Shri Narayan Tiwari. The respondent sought eviction on the ground of personal necessity. The suit was eventually decreed by Munsif, Dhanbad in terms of the judgment and decree dated 5.2.1992. However, it was held in the said judgment that since...
Chhotiya @ Tarkeshwar Mahto Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR665(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J.1. The sole appellant Chhotiya @ Tarkeshwar Mahto was put on trial to face charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation of committing rape upon Sarita Devi. The trial Court having found the appellant guilty for the said charge sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in case of default further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.5.1997 at about 11.30 a.m. while the prosecutrix Sarita Devi was in her gohal (cowshd) for feeding cattle, the appellant entered into the gohal through northern side of the door and got the door bolted and then he caught hold of her and by extending threat of dire consequence committed rap upon her.Further case is that when she raised alarm, her husband Umesh Prasad Mehta (PW 3) came over there and pushed open the door and caught hold of the appellant, when she disclosed her husband that he had committed rap...
Ranvijay Prasad Deo Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Punam Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1316; 2007CriLJ3553
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. These two revision applications arise out of the same impugned order i.e. order dated 27.07.2006 passed by the Trial Court whereby, the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 245/227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for their discharge was rejected and therefore, both the revision petitions heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 749 of 2006 is the husband of the complainant-opposite party whereas, the petitioners in Criminal Revision No. 754 of 2006 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the complainant.2. The facts in short giving rise to this application are that the complainant - opposite party No. 2 Punam Singh (hereinafter called as Complainant) filed a Complaint Case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad being the Complaint Case No. 781 of 2004 against the petitioners i.e. her husband, father-in-law namely Kuseshwar Prasad Deo and mother-in-law namely Kusum De...
Rajeev Kumar Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Jharkhand High Court at Ra ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1968; [2007(3)JCR403(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J. 1. Rajeev Kumar, the petitioner herein, who was appointed as Additional District & Sessions Judge as against the temporary post of Presiding Officer of Fast Track Court in the year 2003, was terminated by the order of the State of Jharkhand dated 11.3.2006. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for quashing the said order dated 11.3.2006.2. The short facts, which are relevant for disposal of the writ petition, are as follows.-An advertisement was issued by the High Court on 23.5.2001 inviting applications for appointment to the post of Additional District & Sessions Judge from Bar quota. The petitioner, who was a practising Lawyer, sent his application. He was called for writing examination. Accordingly, he wrote the written examination. On 19.8.2001, he was informed that he secured minimum qualification marks in the examination and was called for interview. Accordingly, he attended the interview on 6.10.2001. The petitione...
Satish Chandra Agarwal Vs. Sri Dinesh Chandra Agarwal,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR2345
ORDERM. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. Satish Chandra Agarwal is appellant, his brothers, Dinesh Chandra Agarwal, Naresh Chandra Agarwal and Girish Chandra Agarwal are respondents.2. Shatrughan Prasad was the father of the appellant and respondents. After his death the appellant and respondents reached to an agreement for partition and allotment of share in the joint family properties and business on 28.11.1999. Besides some of the properties and share in the business allotted to Satish, appellant, it was agreed that Naresh and Dinesh, respondents 1 and 2 would pay Rs. 50 lakh to the appellant in lieu of the share in other properties.3. On 14.09.2001 for giving effect to the agreement dated 28.11.1999, they entered into fresh agreement to refer to the arbitration without the consent of Satish, the appellant. However, during the course of the arbitration before the Sole Arbitrator, the appellant, on being informed about the said arbitration, sent a letter on 24.09.2001 to the Arbitrator auth...
Teja Singh Vs. the Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-16-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR544]; [2007(3)JCR595(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Petitioner's grievance is that he has been prematurely retired.2. From the service book produced by the Board, it is clear that petitioner's age was originally recorded as '30 years as per doctor's report'. In a different pen and handwriting, '8.11.1947' is mentioned just below the said entry, without any authentication.3. Mr. M.K. Sinha appearing for the petitioner submitted that the service book was in the custody of the employees of the Board and therefore, petitioner has no hand in such manipulation.The manipulation is apparent. As petitioner is sought to be benefited by such manipulation, it can be safely presumed that he got it done with the connivance of the concerned employees of the Board.4. Mr. M.K. Sinha further submitted that Petitioner's age i.e. 30 years, was recorded when the service book was Filled up on 23.2.1970 and not when he joined the service on 8.11.1967.There is nothing on the record to support such contention. Moreover, at the time of appoin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »