Jharkhand Court May 2009 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.
Smt. Kiran Singh Vs. Sarju Verma and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-11-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar134
1. We have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and with their consent this appeal is being disposed of at the admission stage.2. The appellant, who is owner of the vehicle has preferred this appeal against the judgment and award dated 29th March, 2008 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Giridih in Claim Case No. 18 of 2006 whereby the Tribunal directed the appellant-owner to pay the compensation amount and exonerated the respondent- Insurance Company from its liability.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The deceased, Rajesh Verma, aged about 21 years was dashed by a truck bearing registration No. BR-06F/9385 while he was going in a bicycle on the unfateful date of accident i.e. on 9.04.2006. The claimant filed claim application, for the grant of compensation, against the owner of the vehicle and against the insurer of the truck. The owner of the vehicle filed written statement stating, inter alia, that the vehicle was duly insured with the responden...
Employers in Relation to the Management of Lodna Area of Bccl Vs. thei ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-08-2009
Reported in: (2010)ILLJ30Jhar
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 7.9.2006 passed in W.P. (L) No. 4800 of 2006, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad is perfectly legal and valid.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.3. The concerned workman was trammer at Lodna Colliery under the appellant. The management issued a charge sheet dated 21.10.93 to the concerned workman seeking explanation for his absence without leave. The concerned workman submitted his explanation denying the charges brought against him. A departmental proceeding was initiated. On the basis of report of the enquiry officer, the management imposed him punishment by putting him in 'Badli list'. In 1994 the management issued another charge sheet dated 19.10.94 alleging that the concerned workman produced fake medical documents at the time of first enquiry in support...
Uday Kumar Sinha Vs. National Institute of Technology and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-08-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2963
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Rajiv Ranjan, learned Counsel on behalf of the respondents.2. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for quashing the order dated 16.07.2005 (Annexure-10) passed by the Respondent No. 2 by which the petitioner's services have been terminated from the post of Deputy Registrar (Academic) under the respondents, and has also prayed for all consequential reliefs including the continuation of service with all consequential benefits.3. The questions raised by the petitioner are:(i) Whether the impugned order of termination of his services was beyond the authority of the Chairman (Respondent No. 2) of the N.I.T.(ii) Whether the impugned order is completely malafide and arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice.(iii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get the relief prayed for along with heavy compensation.4. Facts of the petitioner's case, which the p...
Durga Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sunil Kumar Tiwary and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-08-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2169
D.N. Patel, J.1. The present petition has been preferred by the objector in Execution Case No. 19 of 1992, mainly for the reasons that the present petitioner has preferred an application under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the Executing Court, which has been registered as Misc. Case No. 4 of 2008, and during pendency of this application before the Executing Court, execution proceedings may not be completed between the original plaintiffs and original defendant and, therefore, the present petition has been preferred.2. Having heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that originally respondent Nos. 1 and 2 had instituted Title Suit No. 342 of 1986 before the concerned trial court and the same was decreed somewhere in the year, 1992. Thereafter, Execution Case No. 19 of 1992 was instituted by the original plaintiffs/decree-holders before the Executing Court.3. It also appears that the present peti...
Bharti Devi Vs. Fagu Mahto
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-08-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Jhar10; 2009(57)BLJR2175
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned Counsel for the Respondent.2. The petitioner, by this writ application, has prayed for quashing the order dated 28.03.2008, passed by the 02nd Munsif, Dhanbad in Execution Case No. 9 of 2003, whereby the petitioner's prayer vide his petition dated-20.09.2007, for dismissal of the execution case, has been rejected.3. Facts of the case in brief are that a suit was filed before the court below for mandatory injunction to restrain the defendants, therein, from interfering with the possession and occupation of the plaintiff from the suit lands.4. The matter was contested by the defendants in the suit. The prayer for permanent injunction was allowed by the trial court in favour of the plaintiff and decree was accordingly passed.Against the decree, the defendant/judgment debtor preferred an appeal. Upon contest, the appeal was dismissed.Thereafter, the plaintiff/decree holder...
Somra Munda, Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2112
1. Appellant No. 1, Somra Munda, is the father of appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 lived at Tangra toil Kamanta, P.S. Khunti. All of them have been found guilty for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of Sukhram Munda (full brother of the appellant No. 1) and each of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, by judgment dated 16.12.1991 passed by 7th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, Khunti in Sessions Trial No. 187 of 1987.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 31.10.1986 at about 6 P.M. the informant's husband, namely, Sukhram Munda, along with his five year old son Sanika Munda, P.W. 6 (tendered) had gone to the house of Mochi Rai Munda, P.W. 1 (declared hostile) to drink liquor. Some time thereafter, the informant heard the scream of her husband, coming from outside. On that, she came out from her house and went towards the road and saw that all the appellants, who were armed with tangi, were assaulting ...
Ram Charitar Sharma Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4726
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.6.2002 and 19.6.2002 respectively passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Garhwa in Sessions Trial No. 442 of 1999/61 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the appellant was convicted under Section 364A and 386 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 364A of the IPC and also ordered to undergo R.I. for three years for the offence under Section 386 of the IPC. However learned court below directed that both the sentences would run concurrently.2. The case of prosecution in short as per the written report of P.W. 8 is that on 17.6.1999 at about 9 p.m., the main door of the informant's house was knocked by unknown persons. The informant's father opened the door. The informant followed his father and went behind him. Three unknown persons standing there threatened his father on the point of pistol. The informant was also threatened at the point of pistol. In...
iftekhar Ahmad Khan and anr. Vs. Md. SahabuddIn and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-05-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Jhar26
M.Y.Eqbal, J. 1. This second appeal by the defendants-appellants is against the judgment of affirmance.2. Plaintiffs-respondents filed Title suit No. 62/98 for declaration of title in respect of suit property and for recovery of possession and further for a declaration that the sale deed dated 29.8.96 executed by defendant No. 1 Rojni Bibi in favour of her sons is null and void, illegal and inoperative. The suit was decreed by Subordinate Judge IV Jamshedpur in terms of judgment dated 21.1.2002. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree the defendants-appellants preferred Title Appeal No. 4/2002 and the same was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Jamshedur in terms of judgment and decree dated 21.6.2006 and the findings recorded by the trial Court has been affirmed.3. The instant second appeal was admitted for hearing on 27.6.2008 on the following substantial question of law:(i) Whether the courts below have correctly decided title of the plaintiff over the suit property on th...
Karu Yadav Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-04-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2444
Jaya Roy, J.This criminal appeal is against the Judgment dated 23.4.2001 passed by Sri Narendra Kumar Shrivastava, the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in Sessions Trial No. 111 of 1999/19 of 2001 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for ten years and further directed to pay a fine of rupees five thousand (5,000/-) by way of compensation within three months from the date of this judgment and default of making payment of fine, further sentenced of R.I. for a period of two years which will run consecutively.2. In short the prosecution case is that the informant Lalita Devi wife of Sri Bijay Rana of village Khuntabad, P.S. Bengabad, District Giridih, on 11.2.99 at about 6.30 A.M. stated before the Officer-in-charge of Bengabad Police Station that on 22.1.1999, her mother-in-law had gone for Saraswati Puja and her father-in-law also went to the relation's house and the informant wa...
Kishore Kumar Deshmukh Vs. Ajay Kumar Sinha @ Gopal and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-04-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar148
ORDERD.N. Patel, J.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to delete the name of respondent No. 4.2. Permission, as prayed for is granted.3. Amendment shall be carried out during course of the day.4. The present writ petition has been preferred mainly for the reason that the trial Court i.e. 1st Additional. Munsif, Jamshedpur has dismissed art application preferred by the present petitioner (original plaintiff) under Order VI Rule 17,of the Code of Civil Procedure, preferred in Title Suit No. 26/1995, dated 27th September, 2006.5. Having heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby quash and set aside the order passed by 1st Additional Munsif, Jamshedpur dated 27th September, 2006 passed in a suit under Order VI Rule 17 of C.P.C. preferred in Title Suit No. 26/1995 for the following facts and reasons:(i) It appears from the fact of the case that present petitioner is original plaintiff, who has filed a Title Su...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »