Jharkhand Court September 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.
Ashiana Housing Limited Vs. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-03-2009
Reported in: (2010)ILLJ523Jhar
Sushil Harkauli, J.1. Affidavits have been exchanged. I have heard both sides at length.2. The impugned order dated 30.01.2009 has been passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Jamshedpur under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. A copy of that order is Annexure-5 to this writ petition. By that order the petitioner has been directed to pay the computed amount of Rs. 1,08,62,124/-(Rupees one crore eight lacs sixty two thousand one hundred twenty four only) on account of Provident Fund Pension Fund, Insurance Fund and Administrative charges. In addition, the petitioner has also been required by the said order to pay an amount of interest of Rs. 76,64,583/- (Rupees seventy six lacs sixty four thousand five hundred eighty three only) within 15 days.3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is engaged in construction industry and in the said industry the petitioner has employed certain long term employees for whom the pr...
Anup Kumar Choudhary Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-03-2009
Reported in: 2009LC(JH)846
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated-19.08.1995 (Annexure-8), by which the Respondents have rejected the petitioner's application for providing electric connection to his premises situated within Plot No. 1253 to 1262 at Mihilong, Namkom in the district of Ranchi. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of his application submitted together with requisite fee, the Respondents have failed to provide electric connection to his premises.2. Earlier, with the same prayer, the petitioner had preferred a writ application vide W.P. (C) No. 3055 of 2005. While disposing of the said writ application, this Court by its order dated 29.06.2005, instead of deciding the case on merits, gave liberty to the petitioner to approach the Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Kokar Urban Area, Ranchi and with a corresponding direction to the Respondents to decide the...
Bablu Singh @ Surya Deo Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2009
Reported in: 2010CriLJ622
Pradeep Kumar, J.1. The Cr. Appeal No. 528 of 2007 filed by Bablu Singh @ Surya Deo Singh and Cr. Appeal No. 486 of 2007 field by Babloo Singh @ Anand Kumar Singh, which arise out of the same Sessions Trial No. 206 of 2006, by which judgment both the appellants were found guilty under Sections 376(g)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years and also to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and in default of the same to undergo further R.I. for a period of one year.2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. There is no explanation for the delay of two days in lodging the first information report when the police station was near. He has further submitted that it will also appear that the informant stated that she went out of her house for easing at 10.30 P.M. in the night and the appellant caught hold of her when she made no 'Hulla' and even after commissi...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›