Jharkhand Court December 2008 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.
Anik Industries Limited Vs. Jharkhand State Housing Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2008
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR382(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. The Jharkhand State Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') decided to develope its property at Adityapur, Jamshedpur by way of joint venture with private developers. For the said purpose, Expression of Interest (EOI for short) was floated by the respondent-Board on 13.11.2005 for different plots, inviting offer in sealed cover from the interested companies having annual turn over of minimum ten crores or from Central/State Government Public Sector Undertakings etc.2. The petitioner submitted its offer along with the requisite documents on 11.12.2005. Company's balance sheet of last three financial years was also submitted to show its financial status.3. By letter dated 25.1.2006, the respondent-Board called the petitioner to attend the pre-bid discussion on 1.2.2006. The letters suggested that the petitioner is eligible and fulfils the essential requirements, as per terms of the EOI.4. The petitioner's representative attended the office of the...
Dr. Banshidhar Sharma Vs. Birsa Agriculture University and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2008
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR364(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. When the case was taken up on 1.12.2008, it was adjourned for today, at the instance of the respondent-University for filing counter affidavit. But while granting adjournment, it was made clear that if the counter affidavit is not filed by the next date, the matter shall be disposed of, on the basis of the materials available on the record. In spite of that no counter affidavit has been filed.2. Accordingly matter was heard.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner got retired on 11.3.1993 as 'an Associate Professor' from Veterinary College, Birsa Agriculture University, Ranchi and was being paid Pension, but all on a sudden, after fifteen years of his retirement, the University has issued a letter vide Memo No. 918 dated 26.2.2008. whereunder it has been communicated that the petitioner has already drawn a sum of Rs. 1,13,155/- as pension in excess, which needs to be deposited by the petitioner, failing which Rs. 3,000/- would b...
Sudarshan Poddar Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1906
Jaya Roy, J.1. The petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revision application against the judgment dated 11.6.2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 2007 passed by Shri Uday Narayan Mishra, 2nd Additional District and Session Judge, Chaibasa whereby the judgment of conviction and sentences dated 20.2.2007 passed by Shri Nirupam Kumar Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class Chaibasa, in Chaibasa Sadar P.S. Case No. 90 of 2001/G.R No. 485 of 2001/T.R. No. 191 of 2007 arising out of C/1 Case No. 72 of 2001 by which the trial court has convicted the petitioner under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced him S.I. for one year and further pay compensation of Rs. 1,50,009/- has been affirmed.2. Short fact of the case is that the complainant opposite party No. 2 Rajeev Khirwal filed a Complain Petition in the court of C.J.M. Chaibasa and the same was registered as C/1 Case No. 72 of 2001. It is alleged in the said complaint petition that the complainant and the accused petitioner are very good friend...
Vol Builders Private Limited and anr. Vs. Janab Salim Saheb and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar84; 2009(57)BLJR680; [2009(1)JCR318(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Challenge in this application is to the order dated 24.8.2007 passed by the learned Munsif, Ranchi in an Execution Proceeding vide Misc. Case No. 25 of 2007, whereby and whereunder the petition filed by the respondent No. 1 under Order 21 Order 97(i)(ii) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was admitted and a direction was issued to the parties to adduce evidence for deciding upon the claim of right, title and interest of the respondent No. 2 over the suit premises.2. Facts of the case in brief is that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for eviction of the respondent No. 2 from the suit premises under the provisions of Section 11(1)(d) of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982. The suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner / plaintiff by order dated 5.8.2006.3. The petitioner thereafter filed an application before the Court below under Order 21 Rule 11 CPC for execution of the decree. The application was registere...
Debabrata Dasgupta Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR281(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. A controversy which was presumed to have been resolved by an order of this Court passed on 16.04.2004 in an earlier writ application vide C.W.J.C. No. 2014 of 1997 (R) has resurfaced once again in the instant writ application filed by the petitioner. The controversy is on the petitioner's claim for his promotion to the post of Associate Professor on the ground that he does possess the requisite qualification for such promotion and his claim which he has been making ever since 1983, has been wrongly denied to him.2. Facts of the petitioner's case in brief is that he was initially appointed as a tutor in the department of Biochemistry on 03.09.1977 in the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Jamshedpur. Such appointment was given to him on the ground that he has possessed the requisite qualification i.e. a Post Graduate Degree in Biochemistry. By a notification dated 23.01.1979 issued by the Department of Health, Government of Bihar, the post of lecturer was divi...
Chhedi Paswan Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR671; [2009(1)JCR549(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.W.P. (S) No. 3861 of 20031. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following reliefs:(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 25.7.02 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Railway (Respondent No. 3 herein) by which the petitioner was dismissed from service and for quashing the order dated 4.7.03 passed by the Appellate Authority, respondent No. 3 herein.(ii) For a direction to the respondents authority to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits in accordance with law.2. The facts, in brief, are set out as under:The petitioner was appointed as a Constable in December, 1983 in the district of Patna and thereafter performed his duty having brilliant service record without any stigma or punishment for the last 19 years. In the year 2001 while the petitioner was posted at Railway Police Station, Jamshedpur, he was found guilty of extortion and snatching Rs. 500/- from the passenger of Gitanjal...
Chandan Kumar Manjhi, P.K. Ghosh @ Deepak Kumar Ghosh and Kalika Patha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-16-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR940
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. In this writ application, the prayer of the petitioners is to quash the F.I.R. of Jugsalai (Bagbera) P.S. Case No. 04/2007, which was registered under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners, who are the railway officials. It appears that one Mankeshwar Singh lodged a first information report before Jugsalai (Bagbera) police station, alleging therein that on 08.01.2007 at about 11:30 A.M. the accused persons namely, Chandan Kumar Manjhi and P.K. Ghosh @ Deepak Kumar Ghosh came to the house of the informant on a vehicle and asked him as to why he has stacked stone boulders in front of his house. They also demanded Rs. 20,000/- from him and also threatened that if the amount was not paid, he would be dispossessed from the land. It has been further alleged in the F.I.R. that on 10.01.2007, they again came to the house of the informant and started demolishing the boundary wails as well as tube well and...
Tripurari Mandal Vs. Oriental Insurance Corporation and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-16-2008
Reported in: 2010ACJ95
1. Heard Mr. S.L. Agarwal, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, and Mr. Prasant Vidyarthi learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company and also Counsel for the claimant and with their consent this appeal is disposed of at the admission stage.2. By the impugned order and award passed by the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal in Compensation Case No. 169 of 2005, a sum of Rs. 1,38,436/-has been awarded for the death of the deceased and liability was fixed upon the appellant-owner of the vehicle.3. The fact which is not in dispute is that the deceased was driving the Tractor belonging to the appellant-owner which turtled as a result of which the deceased came under the wheels of the Tractor and died.4. The case of the claimant-respondent was that he was working as driver under the appellant and was earning Rs 3000/-per month. The Compensation Case was contested by the Insurance Company, (sic) stated that the deceased was not holding a valid driving licence and theref...
Navchetan Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Limited and ors. Vs. State of Jha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-15-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR1713
1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 3.6.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 2574 of 2003 by which he had been pleased to dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioners, appellants herein, to appear before the respondent authority i.e. the Collector-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Dhanbad, and raise all objections bringing all facts to the notice of the authority, who was required to decide the dispute as to whether the petitioners had indulged in encroachment of any forest land.2. The petitioners, appellants herein, have assailed the order passed by the learned Single Judge and it was submitted by the counsel for the appellants that the petitioners-appellants had already filed a Title Suit with regard to the title of the land, alleged to have been encroached by the appellants. It is further submitted that a decree was initially passed in favour of the plaintiffs-appellants in regard to the land, alleged to have been encroache...
Haricharan Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-15-2008
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR408(Jhr)]
ORDERGyan Sudha Misra, C.J.1. This is a petition for contempt alleging non compliance of the order dated 22.2.2008 passed in W.P.(S) No. 3148 of 2007, whereby the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent-Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa to consider the application of the petitioner in its right perspective and decide his claim by a reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the said order.2. The aforesaid order was passed in the writ petition, wherein the petitioner had challenged the order of his termination on the ground that although he had been acquitted of an offence under Section 302, IPC, he was not reinstated in the service of the respondents and the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition, as already indicated hereinbefore, directing the respondent to consider his representation in accordance with law.3. It could be gathered from the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »