Court : Jharkhand
..... the order dated 15th september, 2017 to the proposed arbitrator for submission of a declaration in terms of section 12(1) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 as amended by act no. 3 of 2006 within a period of 3 weeks. let the case appear on 5th january, 2018 as an unfixed case under the same ..... in the proceedings. besides that, learned arbitrator was an employee of the respondent-company itself. he however submits that in view of the arbitration and conciliation amendment act 3 of 2016 also, an independent arbitrator is required to be appointed after termination of the arbitral tribunal. learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the ..... for the parties. petitioner approached this court for appointment of an independent arbitrator in the present application under section 11(6)(c) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 invoking the arbitration clause 21 under the general commercial terms and conditions for purchase, sail pi which is read with clause 12 of the purchase .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... 1988 was definitely beyond the period of limitation. 21. learned counsel for the appellants has tried to rely upon the residuary article 113 under the limitation act. article 113 however contemplates of a limitation period in such circumstances when no period of limitation is provided elsewhere in the schedule. this residuary article would therefore ..... the claim prior to 1982. the claim raised through the schedule were, therefore, held to be barred by law of limitation and the provisions of the arbitration act. 11. learned trial court thereafter proceeded to determine the issue no. 11 in relation to the counter claim raised by the defendants. upon analysis of the ..... plaintiff's cause of action was barred by limitation and the principles of waiver, estoppel and acquiescence. the suit was also barred under the provisions of arbitration act embodied in the contract. they also averred that plaintiff's engagement was on ad hoc basis with effect from 23rd january, 1978 for transportation of goods. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... a prayer in the nature of interim relief which reads as under: for further issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction restraining the respondents from giving effect to or acting pursuant to the demand notice as contained in letter no.1112/m dated 05.10.2017 (annexure-4) issued by the district mining office, lohardaga 8. primarily, ..... one finds that the expression state of odisha has occurred innumerable times and, in fact, after holding that under section 21(5) of the m.m.d.r. act, 1957 the state of odisha can realize compensation from the violator mining lessees, the judgment in common cause case proceeds to calculation on merits . the petitioner-company ..... it is contended that in view of the declaration of law by the supreme court and section 21(5) of the mines and minerals (development and 5 regulation) act, 1957, state government has jurisdiction to realize compensation for illegal mining, for which the state government has issued letter dated 05.10.2017 to the petitioner-company. it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... complainant herself who had admitted about her marriage getting solemnized with the petitioner. this witness has stated about the torture committed upon her and she was also not provided with food. she has further stated that even in ..... affirmation as well as her witnesses cognizance was taken for the offences punishable u/s 498a, 323 of the indian penal code and section 3/4 of the d.p. act. after charge was framed trial proceeded. -3- in course of trial five witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant. p.w.1 (sarita devi) is the ..... petitioner for the offences punishable u/s 498a of the indian penal code and sentencing him to various terms has been affirmed albeit section 4 of the d.p. act in which the petitioner was acquitted, the petitioner has preferred the present application. it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there are several .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... by the principal judge, family court, jamshedpur in matrimonial suit no.406 of 2010. the appellant had approached the learned family court for dissolution of marriage under section 13 (1) (a) of the hindu marriage act while also taking a ground of desertion as per the averments made in the plaint. the case of the appellant in nut-shell is inter alia ..... other cases (supra) decided by the apex court on the issue of mental cruelty and desertion. 7 7. section 23 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 read as under:- 23. decree in proceedings-(1) in any proceeding under this act, whether defended or not, if the court is satisfied that- (a) any of the grounds for granting relief exists and the petitioner ..... the ground that she was suffering from incurable disease as there is no such ground permissible under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955. from the evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner, it did not appear to the learned family court that the respondent-wife ever treated him with cruelty .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... his fees and legal remuneration for conduct of the arbitration proceeding, however, keeping in view the mandate and ceiling prescribed under schedule iv of the act of 1996. learned arbitrator would endeavour to conclude the arbitration proceeding in an expeditious manner also 6. keeping into account the time period stipulated under ..... of arbitrators being the employees of railway authority themselves.10. in the aforesaid factual matrix, and the scheme of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, as amended under act 3 of 2016, respondent cannot appoint their own employee as an arbitrator as it is against the neutrality clause. the arbitration proceeding in ..... trial by an arbitral tribunal . unnecessary delay or expense would frustrate the very purpose of arbitration. interestingly, the second principle which is recognised in the act is the party autonomy in the choice of procedure. this means that if a particular procedure is prescribed in the arbitration agreement which the parties have .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... any provision of the constitution of india. (d) failure to conform to the statute under which it is made or exceeding the limits of authority conferred by the enabling act. (e) repugnancy to the laws of the land, that is, any enactment. (f) manifest arbitrariness/unreasonableness (to an extent where the court might well say that ..... and irrational. we have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, gone through the relevant materials on record and also the relevant provisions of the police act, 1861; police manual and the impugned rules itself. we may, at the outset, observe that the instant rules are altogether new rules framed by the employer state ..... is altogether new rule framed under the provisions of article 309 of the constitution of india by the state government read with section 46(3) of the police act, 1861. it has been notified on 28 th january 2016 vide notification no.252 of the home, prison and disaster management department, government of jharkhand. this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... that since the matrimonial suit before the court below at durgapur has been fixed for 15.12.2017, on which date, the application under section 13(b) of the hindu marriage act as already agreed upon by the parties shall also be filed, necessary application with respect to operating of locker shall also be made by the father of the opp. party ..... the parties have agreed that on the next date of hearing i.e. on 15.12.2017, they shall file an application under section 13(b) of the hindu marriage act for getting the marriage dissolved on mutual consent. further, a case under section 498a of the indian penal code is also pending at durgapur instituted by the opp. party no.2 and ..... coming out from jail, he had instituted a complaint case, which is by way of retaliation, in which allegation has been levelled that the petitioner no.2 has solemnized marriage with the petitioner no.1 whereas the petitioner no.1 in fact had given shelter to the petitioner no.2 when she had gone to visit ayodhya. so far as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... service, unless of course the rules under which he is appointed expressly provide for such a result. therefore even though a probationer may have continued to act in the post to which he is appointed on probation for more than the initial period of probation, he cannot become a permanent servant merely because of ..... . the chief manager (personnel), samadhan cell, hq central coalfields limited, darbhanga house, ranchi, p.o. kuchari, p.s. kotwali, district ranchi. ........respondents coram: hon'ble the acting chief justice hon'ble mr. justice amitav k. gupta for the appellant : m/s amit kumar das, pooja kumari, advocates for respondent no.1 : mr. bishambhar shastri, advocate ..... a. no. 7066 of 2017 with i.a. no. 7064 of 2017 with i.a. no. 7691 of 2017 central coalfields limited, a company incorporated under the companies act, having its registered office at darbhanga house, p.o. ranchi university, p.s. kotwali, district ranchi (jharkhand), through its hod (personnel (admn) sri sanjay kumar, son .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
..... the appellant bablu ansari @ irsad ansari @ aslam ansari guilty for committing offences punishable under sections 302 of the indian penal code and section 27 of the arms act. after finding the appellant guilty of the aforesaid offences, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of rs.5000/- for the offence ..... police registered daltonganj g.r.p.s. case no.24 of 2005 under sections 302/201/34 of the indian penal code and section 27 of the arms act. the first information report was registered against unknown. police investigated the matter and submitted chargesheet against this appellant and another accused person. cognizance was taken and the ..... vide judgment dated 19th may, 2008 convicted this appellant for the offence punishable under section 4 302 of the indian penal code and section 27 of the arms act and further vide order of sentence dated 22nd may, 2008 sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of rs.5000/- for the .....
Tag this Judgment!