Jharkhand Court August 2013 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.
Ashok Kumar Ram ? Nayak Vs. Jhalo Devi and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Misc. Appeal No. 121 of 2011 Ashok Kumar Ram @ Nayak .... Appellant Versus 1. Jhalo Devi 2. Parvati Devi; 3. Deputy Commissioner, Gumla .... Respondents Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the appellant : Mr.S.K.Sharma For the respondents: M/s M.S. Akhtar S C (Mines), A. K. Mehta & B.K.Prasad 29.08.2013 This Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 23.12.2010 passed in Succession Case No. 12 of 2009 whereby Learned District Judge, Gumla, has dismissed the petition and refused to grant succession certificate in favour of the applicant. It is submitted in course of hearing of this appeal that the appellant and the respondents no.1 and 2 are only legal heirs of deceased Sukermani Kumari who died on 18.7.2007. Learned Court below has committed an error by not granting succession certificate in favour of the petitioner, though respondents no.1 and 2, who were opposite parties in the court below, had supported the cas...
Arbind Kumar Tiwary Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 1769 of 2011 Arbind Kumar Tiwary ..... Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Rina Kumari . Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ----- I. A. No.2591 of 2013. 02 /29.08.2013. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the I.A. bearing No.2591 of 2013. Accordingly, this I.A. No.2591 of 2013 stands disposed of. I. A. No.1027 of 2012. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State on an I. A. being I.A. No.1027 of 2012 wherein prayer has been made to allow the petitioner to convert this petition into a revision application. Prayer is allowed. Let this petition be converted into Revision Application. On its conversion, let a fresh stamp report be made. Accordingly, I. A. No.1027 of 2012 stands disposed of,. (R. R. Prasad, J.) Sandeep/...
Neelam Sethi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 693 of 2013 Neelam Sethi Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR. For the Petitioner : - Mr. D.K. Chakaraborty, Advocate For the State : - Mr. Manoj Kumar No. 2, A.P.P. 03/29.08.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by Neelam Sethi, in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No. 353 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 2804 of 2012, pending in the court of S.D.J.M., Jamshedpur, is moved by Sri D.K. Chakaraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Sri Manoj Kumar No. 2, learned Additional P.P. for the State. In the first information report, which is a dying declaration, there is allegation against this petitioner that she used to threaten deceased and even on the date of occurrence, she quarreled with him. Under the said circumstance, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application of petitioner rej...
Jitan KamIn Vs. Coal Mines Provident Fund Orga
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 653 of 2011 Jitan Kamin .... Petitioner Versus Coal Mines Provident Fund Organization & others . Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha For the Respondents : Mr. L.C.N. Shahdeo & Mr. Kaustav Panda I.A. No. 5396 o04. 29.08.2013 By way of instant interlocutory application petitioner seeks an early hearing of the case. Learned counsel for the respondent- CCL seeks time to file response to the prayer made in the instant writ application where the grievances of the petitioner is that she has not been paid family pension from 13.12.1990 after death of her husband though compassionate appointment , C.M.P benefits , L.C.S have been paid. The respondent- C.M.P.F have filed their affidavit. In view of the request made by learned counsel for the respondent- CCL , 3 weeks time is allowed to enable him to file his response. In view of the aforesaid order, I.A. No. 5...
Bishen Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Another
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.2725 of 2012 Bishen Singh ......................................Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand and another .....Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner: Mr.A.K.Sah 4/ 29.8.13. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application. Permission is accorded. This application is dismissed as withdrawn. (R.R.Prasad, J.) ND/...
Anil Kumar Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 7124 of 2011 Anil Kumar Sinha .... Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand & others ..... Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : Mr. Krishna Shankar For the Respondents : J.C. to G.P. VI I.A. No. 748 of 2012 & I.A. No. 5550 o04. 29.08.2013 By way of I.A. No. 748 of 2013 petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 21.9.2011 contained in memo no. 1327 passed by the Director, Social Welfare,Woman and Child Development Department, Government of Jharkhand as also by way of I.A. No. 5550 of 2013 petitioner seeks an early hearing of the matter. According to the petitioner, the writ petition was preferred for directing the respondents to pay the pension which was stopped from August,2011as also arrears of 50% of the 6th Pay Revision. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by the instant order, which is proposed to be incorporated in the main writ application, the respondents have ...
Baijnath Mehta and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2351 o1. Baijnath Mehta 2. Lalchand Mehta 3. Lal Mohan Mehta @ Chhotelal Mehta... ....Petitioners Vs. The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioners: Mr. Deepak Kumar For the State: Mr. Manoj Kumar No. 2, APP 3/29.08.2013: It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 1, namely, Baijnath Mehta has been arrested. Thus, anticipatory bail application filed on his behalf has become infructuous. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioner no. 1, namely, Baijnath Mehta is dismissed as infrcutous. So far other petitioners are concerned, office is directed to send a reminder to the court concerned for calling for the case diary, through FAX at the cost of petitioner and put up this case after receipt of the same. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...
Joshna Karmakar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cont. Case (C). No.322 of 2011 Joshna Karmakar .................................................Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand and others..........................Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner :Mr.P.K.Mukhopadhyay For the State : J.C to S.C.II For the DMC :Mr.Raunak Sahay 14/ 29.8.13. Learned counsel appearing for the DMC submits that the authority having found certain amount to be payable towards retiral dues has passed an order for making payment of the amount of Rs.2,21,798/-and a cheque has been prepared which is to be handed over to the petitioner whenever the petitioner would be approaching to the office. In this regard, it was further submitted that the said amount of Rs.2,21,798/- does not include the arrears of salary for the period from 2002 to 2006 as certain verification is to be made in this regard which would be done within a period of one month and therefore, the matter be posted a...
Kailash Pati Mahatha Vs. Divisional Forest Officer and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI CivilRevisionNo.04of2013 KailashPatiMahatha Petitioner Versus 1.DivisionalForestOfficer,DhanbadDivision,NewBokaroDivision,Bokaro 2.TheRanger,ChasRangeForestDepartment,Bokaro 3.TheChiefSecretary,GovernmentofJharkhand 4.TheSecretary,ForestDepartment,GovernmentofJharkhand 5.TheDeputyCommissioner,Bokaro 6.ElectroSteelIntegratedLimited 7.HaripadaMahatha Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :M/sRajivRanjan,YogeshModi& ChaitaliC.Sinha,Advocates FortheState :Mr.RajeshShankar,G.A. Mr.AbhayPrakash,Advocate ForRespondentNo.6 :Mr.IndrajitSinha,Advocate 07/29.08.2013 This civil revision has been preferred by petitioner Kailash Pati Mahathaagainsttheorderdated20.12.20012,passedbylearnedPrincipal DistrictJudge,BokaroinCivilMisc.CaseNo.32of2011wherebytheTitle AppealNo.33of2007,whichstooddismissedfordefaulton15.09.2011, wasrestored.2. Itiscontendedthattheimpugnedordersufferswithillegality. The grounds on which the appeal was restored is not ...
Astha Bahu Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6112 of 2013 Astha Bahu Singh @ Munna Singh @ Astha Bahnu Singh ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/29.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 406/420/467/468/504 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Chandil P.S. Case No.81 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.474 of 2012. The police case was instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by one M/s Santosh Enterprises, a partnership firm, against the petitioner, in which it is alleged that some land was sold to the firm by the petitioner and his father after taking the entire consideration money from the firm. When the complainant went to take possession of the land, the co-sharer of the land opposed, as there was no partition between the...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »