Jharkhand Court June 2008 Judgments
Dr. Tribhuwan Nath Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand Through S.P., C.B. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(57)BLJR12
D.K. Sinha, J.1. This Cr. Revision is directed against the order dated 16.2.2008 passed by Shri P.C. Agarwal, Special Judge, C.B.I.-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, VIII, Dhanbad in R.C.1A/03-D whereby and whereunder the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner on 4.12.2007 for seeking permission to leave India for United States of America for a period of six months in connection with specialized medical treatment of his wife was refused.2. The relevant fact of the case is that cognizance of the offence was taken for the offence under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 471 I.P.C. and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act against the petitioner under the allegation that the petitioner being the Director of the Central Mining Research Institute, Dhanbad (in short CMRI) in prosecution of criminal conspiracy incurred loss to the Institute for his personal gains.3. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Sinha made the following submissions: The petitioner retired several ye...
Tag this Judgment!V.i.P. Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR158(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. Petitioner has challenged the Tender Notice No. 23154 (Shiksha) 8-9, dated 4,6.2008.3. Mr. Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that once a decision was taken to award the work to the petitioner and it was asked to deposit the additional security money and the draft agreement, the respondents could not advertise fresh tender for the same work, to the detriment of the petitioner.4. Mr. Gadodia, appearing for the State supported the action.5. The relevant facts in short are as follows. The tender in question was floated for supply, transportation and installation of polypropylene chairs for Stadium. Three tenderers, including the petitioner were required to provide samples as per the tender notice, but the petitioner furnished the sample, at last on 17.4.2008. However, it was sent for test. It was found that the sample chair was made of polypropylene. As petitioner's offer for normal chair was lowest i...
Tag this Judgment!Shankutala Devi and Abhishekh Kumar Vs. Gangadhar Mahto,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR642(Jhr)]
1. This Misc. Appeal is directed against the judgment/award impugned dated 4.4.2007 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-A.D.J. F.T.C., Bermo at Tenughat, Bokaro in M.V. Claim Case No. 94 of 2004 against the inadequate compensation granted to the appellants-claimants by way of final award under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, 1988.2. The claimants had demanded a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- on the accidental death of Prabhat Kumar Mishra aged about 26 years who was the son of the applicant No. 1 and the brother of the applicant No. 2.3. The brief fact of the case was that in the evening of 22.08.2002 Prabhat Kumar Mishra (since deceased) was returning to his home on his scooter and as soon as he reached near the village Bakaspura i.e. Barkban at about 7 p.m., a truck bearing registration No. BR 17G-5607 being driven rashly and negligently dashed the scooter as a result of which Prabhat Kumar Mishra sustained grievous injuries and he was removed to Referal Hosptial, Jaina More...
Tag this Judgment!Stan Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Managing Director, Pawan Kumar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar14; 2008(56)BLJR2914; [2008(4)JCR162(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner, which is a manufacturing unit of MS Ingots, castings and other still products, had taken loan of Rs. 55 Lacs from the respondents-Punjab and Sind Bank under hypothecation after equitable mortgage in the year 2001 by way of cash credit facility.2. The petitioner had been paying the amount of accrued interest and submitting the stock statement and other documents as prescribed by the Bank.3. By letter dated 9.3.04 (Annexure-2), the petitioner was informed by the respondents-Bank that the sale proceeds as well as the stock statement have not been submitted and the same must be submitted to the Bank.4. The petitioner submitted all the required documents and also explained that the delay was due to illness of the Director (Annexure-3). The petitioner requested the respondents-Bank to resume the transaction.5. Suddenly the petitioner was served with a notice dated 29.11.04 (Annexure-8) from the respondents-Bank purportedly sent under Section 13(2) o...
Tag this Judgment!Employers in Relation to the Management of Food Corporation of India a ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR2487; [2008(118)FLR1063]; [2009(1)JCR670(Jhr)]; (2009)ILLJ163Jhar
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Both these Letters Patent Appeals filed by the appellant Food Corporation of India are directed against a common judgment dated 19.5.2005 passed by a learned Single judge in CWJC No. 5857 of 1997 and CWJC No. 4497 of 1997 whereby both the writ petitions, filed by the Management/appellant herein against the Awards of the Industrial Tribunal No. 1 in favour of the respondent workmen in Reference case No. 96 of 1992 and Reference Case No. 108 of 1992 respectively, were dismissed.2. The case of the workman in CWJC No. 5857 of 1997 relating to Reference Case No. 96 of 1992, is that he was employed as a casual typist in the district office of the Food Corporation of India on 5.9.1986 and worked there till 27.7.1990. But from 28.7.1990 he was stopped by the Management from working. He was paid wages up to 15.5.1990 and thereafter no payment was made to him and on the contrary, his name was struck off from the Rolls from 15.5.1990. His assertion was that he had worked for ...
Tag this Judgment!Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. Vs. Board of Industrial and Financi ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR633(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. This interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited (for short 'H.E.C.') with a prayer to direct the Government of Jharkhand to pay the up-to-date amount on account of rent payable by the Government of Jharkhand to H.E.C., against occupation of the buildings of H.E.C.2. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, appearing for the H.E.C. submitted that the calculation up to December, 2007 was given in this interlocutory application but thereafter also the rent has fallen due.3. Mr. S.B. Gadodia. learned Advocate General, appearing for the State of Jharkhand, submitted that the amount claimed is based on the enhanced rate of 25% and thus it is disputed; and secondly when the rehabilitation package is pending, the State Government is not liable to pay the rent.4. After hearing the parties at length, the following position emerges. The relevant portion of order dated 3.2.2005 passed in this case reads as under:LA. No. 106 of 2005:I.A. No. 106 of...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Kumarsingh Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Cbi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR145(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and learned Counsel appearing for the CBI on the matter of bail.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant proprietor of M/s. Raj Care was convicted for the offences under Sections 420/468/471 read with Sections 465 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and was awarded maximum sentence of six years for one of the offences on the allegation that the appellant without supplying Ground Nut Cake and Wheatbran to the extent as claimed took payment of entire materials but the prosecution has failed palpably to establish the charge that the appellant did not supply the materials to the extent which the appellant claimed to have supplied rather the appellant was convicted on the premises that the appellant had failed to give explanation regarding place from where the appellant had purchased the materials and that the appellant did not produce any documents such as road permit, challan to establ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sona Kumar Arya Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR112(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. This present writ petition has been preferred by the writ petitioner for issuance of an appropriate writ/order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 11.5.2001 issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder his suspension order has been revoked with the following punishments:(I) Salary for the period from 19.1.2000 and 22.1.2000 shall not be paid.(II) Withholding two Annual Increments with cumulative effect.(III) Nothing shall be paid to the petitioner for the period of suspension except subsistence allowance and also for quashing of order dated 16.8.2002 issued by the Commissioner, Chotanagpur Division vide memo No. 690 whereby and whereunder the appeal of the petitioner was rejected.2. I have heard the arguments at length.3. The disciplinary authority vide its order dated 11.5.2001 imposed a major penalty as aforesaid, finding him guilty and the same is not a speaking order. However, the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Gulf Oil Corporation Limited and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and S ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR2456; [2008(3)JCR424(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard both sides at length.2. The present criminal miscellaneous petition has been preferred by Gulf Oil Corporation Ltd. and others connected with the affairs of the said Firm against order dated 8.8.2007 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in Complaint Case No. 421 of 2007 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against them.3 Brief facts in short leading to this petition are that the opposite party No. 2, M/s S.N. Ghosh was appointed as (C & F) Agent for clearance and distribution of the products of Gulf Oil Corporation Ltd. for M/s R.M. Autolube and M/s S.N. Ghosh and Company having its offices at Kolkata and Jamshedpur, for the town of Jamshedpur and Ranchi on 1.11.1998 in furtherance of the terms and agreement dated 14.8.1998. According to the complainant, he developed the business of the petitioner-Company to flourish. However, the accounts showing the deposit of cheques sent towards payment of supply of goods by the petitioner was not properly ...
Tag this Judgment!Laxman Prajapati and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Tekani Devi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR2480; [2008(4)JCR137(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The learned Counsel for the petitioners sought for and is permitted to carry out certain corrections in paragraph-1 of this petition.2. The petitioners have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of the order dated 31.3.2003 whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offence was taken under Sections 498A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code in Complaint Case No. 1091 of 2002 corresponding to T.R. No. 1343 of 2003 by Shri Diwakar Pandey, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh.3. The short fact of the case as alleged in the complaint petition was that the complainant/opposite party No. 2 was married to the petitioner No. 1 Laxman Prajapati in the year 1992 according to the Hindu rites and rituals and the parents of the complainant/opposite party No. 2 had spent huge amount at the time of marriage but could not afford to make further cash payment of Rs. 5,000/- on account of poverty. After marriage the complainant/opposite par...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »