Jharkhand Court May 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.
Vijay Kumar Verma Vs. Madhuri Verma @ Puspa Verma
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-04-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Jhar104; 2007(2)BLJR1802; [2007(3)JCR4(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.4.1992 passed in First Appeal No. 89 of 1987 (R) whereby the learned Single Judge set aside the judgment and decree dated 30.9.1986 passed by the 4th Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Matrimonial Suit No. 12 of 1986.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The plaintiff-appellant filed aforementioned Matrimonial Suit No. 12 of 1986 against the respondent-wife under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for a decree of divorce. The plaintiff's case was that he and the respondent was married at Gay in May, 1984 according to Hindu rites and customs. After the marriage, the respondent came to Ranchi at her husband's place and stayed there for some days and went back to her father's place. In 1985, a child was born at Gaya. Respondent again came to her husband's place in 1985 and left for Gaya in 1986. Since then she is residing at Gaya and another child was bor...
Bijma Devi and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-04-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR117(Jhr)]
ORDERD.P. Singh, J.1. Heard both the sides.2. This Cr. Misc. application has been preferred by the petitioners against the order of the Sessions Judge, Bokaro, dated 21.8.2003 by which the bail granted to these petitioners by the learned ACJM, Bokaro has been cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C.3. Admittedly the petitioners have been charge-sheeted for the offences under Sections 364, 498A of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in connection with B.T.P.S. Case No. 40 of 2001, remanded in judicial custody and their prayer for bail was earlier rejected by the same Court on 6.7.2001. However, by order dated 18.8.2001 the same Court allowed the prayer for bail. Hence the prayer for cancellation of bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro.4. The petitioners asserted in this petition that the learned Sessions Judge has committed a mistake of law by cancelling the bail bonds as the bail granted once should not have been interfered and cancelled except on ...
Meena Sinha and ors. Vs. Director, Central Tassar and Research and Tra ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-04-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ2430; [2008(1)JCR129(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The claimants, who are the appellants, have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi awarded a sum of Rs. 4,73,160/- by way of compensation in compensation case No. 89/2002.2. The claimants filed claim application claiming a sum of Rs. 17,76,560/- as compensation for the death of one Dhirendra Kumar who died in a motor vehicle accident.3. The facts of the case are that on 22.4.2002 when the deceased, Dhirendra Kumar, a CCL employee, was going to Lalpur on his motorcycle, a bus bearing registration No. BPY 4180 dashed his motorcycle from the backside and crushed him under its rear wheels. The deceased received grievous injuries and died on the spot. Claimants' case is that the deceased was 45 years of age and his annual income was Rs. 2,00,606.60/-.4. The tribunal, after appreciation of the evidence, assessed compensation at Rs. 4,73,160/-. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants-claimants assailed the q...
Rabindra Munda Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-03-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR245(Jhr)]
1. Sole appellant Rabindra Munda stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life, by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No. 211 of 1996.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that in the evening of October 8, 1995 in between 5.30 to 6.30 p.m., informant Safique Ansari was going along with deceased on Trekker bearing Registration No. BEM 1300 from Petarwar to Maganpur. The informant was the Khalasi and driver of the said vehicle in which only three passengers were travelling. According to informant, as soon as the vehicle reached near Chopadar valley. they found some of the vehicles were standing on the road from before so the driver stopped the vehicle there, Further stated, as soon as the vehicle stopped, three armed persons came there and demanded money from them. According to the informant, one of the assailants put a revolver on the chest of the driver while ...
Uttam Kujur Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-03-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR306(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Assailing the judgment dated 27th February. 2007, passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 42 of 2007, quashing the transfer order of Binod Kumar. respondent No. 5 in L.P.A. No. 74 of 2007 and respondent No. 1 in L.P.A. No. 114 of 2007, the State as also the appellant. Uttam Kujur, have preferred these two appeals. The issue involved in both the appeals being similar, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Circumstances leading to filing of the writ petition may be summarized as under. Respondent Binod Kumar and the appellant Uttam Kujur both are working as Assistant Engineers (Civil) in the State of Jharkhand. Respondent Binod Kumar was posted as Assistant Engineer, Medical Building Sub-Division No. 1, Bariyatu, Ranchi vide Memo No. 1547 (Bh) dated 16th June, 2006. He joined the place of posting on 19th September, 2006. Vide Notification No. 3885(Bh) dated 30th December, 2006 as many as fifteen Assistant Enginee...
C.C. Vermani Son of Shri Lajat Rai Vermani Vs. Bihar State Tourism Dev ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: 2(2007)BC2399; [2007(4)JCR76(Jhr)]
Permod Kohli, J.1. Respondent No. 1 proposed to construct a Bazar Complex at Main Road, Ranchi for commercial purposes. It issued a brochure giving the salient features of the proposed complex. As many as 29 shops were proposed to be constructed. Out of 29 shops, 23 shops were reserved for General Category, 3 shops numbering 3, 10 & 13 for Scheduled Tribe, 1 shop No. 26 for Scheduled Caste, 1 shop No. 6 for Physically disabled person and 1 shop No. 27 for woman. The shops were allotted by drawing lottery from the names of the applicants preferring allotment of the same. The period of allotment was on long lease of 66 years renewable thereafter at the discretion of Corporation with fresh terms and conditions. The Salami amount of lease for each shop was fixed at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- for each sq. ft. area of the shop. The annual ground rent of the shop was fixed at the rate of Re. 1/- per sq. ft. Interested persons/firms/institutions were required to apply in the prescribed form attac...
Dilip Singh @ Dilip Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR499(Jhr)]
ORDERD.P. Singh, J.1. Heard Doth the sides.The learned Counsel for the petitioner, Dilip Singh, submitted that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Sakchi P.S. Case No. 189 of 2005 from 28.11.2006. The learned Counsel further submitted that the petitioner along with two others has been involved in this case falsely by the informant against whom his brother has lodged Sakchi P.S. Case No. 188 of 2005 for various offences including under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Mr. P.P.N. Roy, learned Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that originally the FIR was lodged under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and afterwards charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code also.2. My attention was drawn towards the late submission of the charge-sheet against the petitioner and also that in counter case charge-sheet has been submitted against the informant and others. It is submitted that in counter case the evidence as well as FSL reports fal...
Ram Sahay Mahto, Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1779; II(2007)DMC494; [2007(4)JCR536(Jhr)]
Dilip Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction under Section 304B and 201/34 I.P.C. passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in Sessions Trial No. 51/98 whereby the appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years in each count with direction that both the sentences shall run concurrently against the appellants.2. The prosecution story as it stands narrated in the written report presented by the informant Bodhi Mahto (P.W. 3) that he had married his daughter Fula Devi in the year 1997 with the appellant No. 1 Ram Sahay Mahto. After marriage all the three appellants viz. son-in-law Ram Sahay Mahto, father-in-law Nema Mahto and the mother-in-law Parvati Devi of Fula Devi (since deceased) started perpetrating torture to her by raising demand of Rs. 20,000/- in cash and Rajdoot motorcycle to be brought from her parental home. When she expressed inability of the people of...
National Insurance Company Vs. Gandhwa OraIn and ors.,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR189a(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the parties.2. The insurance company has filed all these appeals against the interim compensation, awarded by the Tribunal under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.3. The interim award is always subject to the final adjudication of the matter by the Tribunal.4. After going through the impugned interim award, passed by the Tribunal, we are of the view that the impugned interim award does not call for any interference by this Court. Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the said award. Consequently, having found no merit, all these appeals are dismissed.5. The Insurance Company is directed to pay the amount of interim compensation minus the statutory amount, which has already been deposited, to the claimants by handing over cheques to the claimants before the Lok Adalat Scheduled to be held on 12th May 2007.6. The statutory amounts, deposited by the Insurance Company, shall also be disbursed to the claimants in the Lok Adalat Scheduled to be held on 12t...
Girja Devi Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: 2007ACJ2056
M.Y. Eqbal and D.K. Sinha, JJ.1. Having heard the learned Counsel for the appellant in the limitation matter, delay in filing this appeal is condoned.LA. No. 1867 of 2006 stands disposed of.2. The claimant-appellant has filed this appeal challenging the judgment/award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur, whereby Compensation Case No. 41 of 1998 was dismissed.3. According to the claimant-appellant, on 29.4.1998 at about 8.30 a.m. while she was proceeding to attend her office and as soon as she reached near Tisco Town Office, one dumper bearing registration No. OR 09-7592 coming in excessive speed dashed the claimant, Girja Devi, as a result of which she fell down on the earth and sustained grievous injuries on her left leg and she was removed to T.M. Hospital where she got her treatment. When the notice of claim case was received by the respondent, written statement was filed wherein it was stated that claimant received compensation of Rs. 81,331 from the employer ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›