Jharkhand Court July 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.
K.K. Jha 'Kamal' and Anr. and Tanzeem E. Sufia Vs. Shri Pankaj Kumar A ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Jhar67; [2007(3)JCR193(Jhr)]
ORDERM. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. The history leading to the initiation of the contempt proceedings against K.K. Jha 'Kamal' a lawyer practicing in this Court as well as against his client Ashok Kumar Gupta, the contemners is a chequered one. The details are as follows:(a) A title suit was filed by the respondent 3 against Ashok Kumar Gupta, the second contemner, the Secretary, Tanzeem-e-Sufia, in the year 1983. Ultimately, this suit was decreed. The said decree was put in execution in Execution Case No. 12 of 1984 in the Court of Sub Judge-I, Giridih.(b) One Ram Lakhan Prasad, an advocate, respondent 2 continued to appear on behalf of the decree holders. An objection was raised in execution petition on behalf of the said Ashok Kumar Gupta, Secretary that the entire decree and the orders passed in Execution Proceeding was a nullity, because the said Shri Ram Lakhan Prasad did not file any vakalatnama before pleading the case on behalf of the respondent-decree holders.(c) The said objec...
Court on Its own motion Vs. K.K. Jha 'Kamal' and Ashok Kumar Gupta (Co ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR2545
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. The history leading to the initiation of the contempt proceedings against K.K. Jha 'Kamal' a lawyer practicing in this Court as well as against his client Ashok Kumar Gupta, the contemners is a chequered one. The details are as follows:(a) A title suit was filed by the respondent 3 against Ashok Kumar Gupta, the second contemner, the Secretary, Tanzeem-e-Sufia, in the year 1983. Ultimately, this suit was decreed. The said decree was put in execution in Execution Case No. 12 of 1984 in the Court of Sub Judge-I, Giridih.(b) One Ram Lakhan Prasad, an advocate, respondent 2 continued to appear on behalf of the decree holders. An objection was raised in execution petition on behalf of the said Ashok Kumar Gupta, Secretary that the entire decree and the orders passed in Execution Proceeding was a nullity, because the said Shri Ram Lakhan Prasad did not file any vakalatnama before pleading the case on behalf of the respondent-decree holders.(c) The said objection ...
Kunal Gaurav Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR72(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties for final disposal.2. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.12.2004, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro (Annexure-8) canceling petitioner's appointment.3. Petitioner's case is that his father late Durga Paswan died in harness on 12.4.2002. Durga Paswan nominated petitioner's mother namely Smt. Sandhya Devi (second wife) for receiving retiral benefits vide Annexure-2. There was a settlement between the petitioner's mother and Radha Devi (first wife) (respondent No. 4) that Radha Devi will receive the retiral benefits and pension and she will have, no objection to appointment of petitioner on compassionate ground. The affidavit to the said effect has been annexed as Annexure-4 series. Thereafter, petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground by order dated 4.8.2003 (Annexure-5) but on the objection of respondent No. 4, his appointment has been cancelled on the ground that petitioner is son of second wife and the second marriage ...
Birendra Kumar Gupta Vs. Bhushan Rajwar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR207(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The appellant/claimant has preferred this appeal against the order dated 27.1.2007 passed by the Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal, Bokaro in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 55 of 2003, whereby the compensation amount of Rs. 35,000/- was awarded to the claimant. The grievance of the appellant is confined only to the quantum of compensation awarded to him,2. Facts of the case in brief, on the basis of which the claim for compensation was preferred before the tribunal, is that on 16.2.2007 while the claimant was going on his motorcycle towards the market, a Jeep bearing registration No. BPO 5134 being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, dashed against the motorcycle and as a result of which, claimant sustained multiple injuries including fracture of his left thigh an right wrist. He was admitted to the Bokaro General Hospital where he had obtained medical treatment. Though, he was discharged from the hospital after obtaining the medical treatment, the injuries had left him disabled si...
Raghab Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR60(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard.2. Petitioner filed this writ petition for payment of salary alleging that the salary has been stopped from March, 1992.3. This writ petition was filed on 20th September, 2002 i.e. after about more than ten years.4. Petitioner's explanation for such a long delay is that during the said period of ten years, he was regularly reporting on his duty and was waiting for final outcome of the action taken against other similarly situated persons. It is further submitted that other similarly situated persons, who filed writ petition, have been allowed to join. It is further submitted that petitioner was not given proper opportunity to show-cause. As per the notice dated 19.4.2003 (Annexure A), show-cause could be filed within 15 days from the receipt thereof, but on 3.5.2003 i.e. on 14th day, order of termination of petitioners was passed.5. Mr. Modi appearing for the State submitted that in August/September, 1991 it was detected that petitioner was appointed on t...
Naresh Kumar Gupta Vs. Sunita Kumari and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR566(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The main issue raised in this appeal, which has been preferred against the judgment and Award dated 6.1.2007 passed in Claim Case No. 80 of 2004 by the Additional Claim Tribunal,2. Hazaribagh, is in respect of the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal to the appellant/claimant with regard to the alleged injury sustained by the appellant and the alleged disablement suffered by him as a result of the alleged road accident. 2. Facts of the case in brief is that on 10.4.2004 the appellant along with his wife Sunayana Devi was travelling on a Jeep bearing registration No. JH 02B 5905 on their return home. On account of the alleged rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by its driver, the vehicle dashed against the road side tree resulting in severe injuries to all the passengers of the vehicle including the appellant and his wife. Both of them were removed to the nearest hospital where they were provided first aid and thereafter, they were admitted to the local nursing ...
Sunaina Devi Vs. Sunita Kumari and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR564(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal by the claimant/appellant is for enhancement of the amount of compensation, awarded to the appellant by the Claims Tribunal, Hazaribagh by order dated 6.1.2007, passed in Title (MV) Suit No. 81 of 2004.2. The facts of the case in brief is that on 10.4.2004, the appellant along with her husband Naresh Kumar Gupta was travelling on a Jeep bearing Registration No. JH02 B 5905 on their return to home. On account of the alleged rash and negligent driving by its driver, the vehicle dashed against a roadside tree, resulting in severe injuries to the passengers of the vehicle including the appellant and her husband. Both of them were removed to the nearest Hospital, where they were provided first-aid and thereafter both of them were admitted to the local Nursing home for proper medical treatment. The appellant has claimed that she had suffered multiple grievous injuries and had undergone medical treatment at the nursing home as an indoor patient for about ten days and in co...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›