Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : [2008(3)JCR251(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the instant writ application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the defendants-petitioners have challenged the order dated 9.7.2007 passed by Munsif, 1st, Dhanbad in Title suit No. 113/2006 whereby the application for amendment of the plaint has been allowed.2. The plaintiffs--respondents filed the aforementioned suit for declaration that the cancellation of agreement of sale dated 16.9.2003 by legal notice dated 28.6.2005 is illegal, void, without jurisdiction and not binding on the plaintiff and further for a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from negotiating sale of flat/office.3. Plaintiffs' case is that the defendants are the owners of complex, namely, Laxami Complex in which there is multi-storied building. The plaintiffs approached the defendants to purchase one flat and contract was entered into between the parties on a consideration of Rs. 6,67,000/- with terms and conditions. The plaintiffs alleged to have paid Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : [2004(4)JCR433(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J. 1. This appeal at the instance of plaintiff-appellant is directed against the judgment dated 28.6.1997 passed in Original Suit No. 2/96/Probate Case No. 161/93 whereby and whereunder the learned IVth Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi granted the Probate of Will of Late Lachhman Prasad Agarwal in favour of the plaintiff-appellant in part.2. The case of the plaintiff-appellant (hereinafter to be referred as 'appellant'} is that the appellant has filed an application in the Court of learned Judicial Commissioner. Ranchi for grant of Probate of the Will executed by Late Lachhman Prasad Agarwal who was her husband and which was his last Will executed on 31.3.1992 and the same day it was registered also in the office of the District Sub-Registrar. Ranchi within the jurisdiction of this Court. By his last Will, Late Lachhman Prasad Agarwal bequeathed all his estate, properties, moneys rights and assets belonging to him to his wife-appellant. By that Will, he beq...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : 2005(2)BLJR1580; [2005(3)JCR1(Jhr)]
Altamas Kabir, C.J.1. The State Bank of India, the respondent No. 1 in the present appeal, filed Money Suit No. 12 of 1983 against the appellant and proforma respondents for recovery of its dues amounting to Rs. 6,43,663/84-P. The defendants appeared and contested the suit by filing their written statement and taking the plea that there was no cause of action for the suit, which was, therefore, not maintainable. As many as 11 issues were framed. While issues Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were decided against the plaintiff and in favour of the contesting defendants No. 1 to 6, issues No. 9 and 8 were partly allowed. Issue No. 3 was decided in favour of the plaintiff and so were the issues No. 1, 2 and 11. In the result, the suit was decreed in part. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in the suit, the State Bank of India, filed an appeal in this Court, being FA No. 766 of 1992 R. The said appeal ultimately succeeded and by judgment dated 20th August 2004, the findings of the trial Court...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : 2001(49)BLJR2182
V.K. Gupta, C.J. 1. A very short point isinvolved for consideration in this case. The petitioner challenges the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act and with regard to the issuance of the Notices in terms of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the Assessing Officer has wrongly obtained the approval of the Joint Commissioner before issuing the impugned notices whereas he should have obtained the approval of the Board because that was the requirement of law as it stood in the year 1988, relating to the Assessment Year 1988-89.2. Admittedly the petitioner received a notice in terms of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. 1961 (the notice is dated 8.12.1998) whereby the petitioner was informed by the Assessing Officer that he had reasons to believe that his income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 1988-89 had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act and that, therefore, the Assessing Officer proposed to reasse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : 2005(2)BLJR909; I(2005)DMC549; [2005(3)JCR456(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This instant application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the Order dated 21.12.1998 passed in C/1 Case No. 586/1996, whereby and whereunder the learned Court below has been pleased to Order for framing charge against the petitioners under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. The case of the petitioners is that complainant-opposite party filed a case to the effect that he was in search of a suitable bridegroom for his eldest daughter Kiran Pandey then he got information that petitioner Purshottan Dubey, is also interested to perform marriage of his son and there was a negotiation between both the sides and in course of negotiation the petitioner said to the complainant-opposite party that there would be no demand of dowry. Thereafter the opposite party was telephonically informed to come to the residence of the petitioner and he went there and he was asked to pay sum of Rs. 1.50 lacs to meet the expenses of Barati, transportat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : [2004(3)JCR439(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. As all these cases relate to assessment of municipal tax of Deoghar Municipality, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order,2. The main grievance of the petitioners in all the writ application is that Deoghar Municipality has arbitrarily enhanced the municipal tax, as affirmed by the appellate committee in some of the cases.3. To determine the issue, it is desirable to notice the relevant prayer and facts of the individual cases, as mentioned hereunder :W.P. (C) No. 5014/01This petitioner has challenged the notice dated 27th January, 1999, whereby, the Deoghar Municipality has increased the municipal tax by revision of assessment with effect from 1.4.1998.The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the land appertaining to Holding No. 213 (New), Ward No. 12 within Deoghar Municipal Area from one Sri Dhirendra Nath Rai vide sale deed No. 3153 dated 31st December, 1997. He was paying municipal tax at the rate of Rs. 52.8...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : [2006(4)JCR140(Jhr)]
Permod Kohli, J.1. Legality and validity of the order dated 23.3.1999 passed by the Commissioner of South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi in Gumla S.A.R. Revision No. 122 of 1996 (Annexure-6) has been called in question by the present petitioners, whereby the revisional authority after reversing the judgments of the court of first instance and that of the appellate authority directed the restoration of the land in favour of respondent No. 5. Before dwelling upon the issues involved in this writ petition, it is useful to recapitulate the factual background emerging from the record.2. Plot No. 1494 measuring 0.39 acres under khata No. 84 of Mouza-Gumla was recorded as raiyati holding of one Tipu Kharia son of Deba Kharia father of respondent No. 5 herein. This plot of land measuring 0.39 acres was under the Zamindari of one Baraik Deokinandan Singh, who was Khewatdar of Khewat No. 3. The recorded raiyat Tipu Kharia surrendered 0.09 acres of land out of 0.39 acres in the aforesaid plot to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : 2003ACJ1986
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-New India Assurance Co. Ltd, (Company for short) against the judgment dated 18th February, 1998 passed by the learned single Judge in Misc. Appeal No. 81 of 1994 (R).2. The applicants Most. Sundia Devi and others filed claim for compensation of Rs. 4 lacs before the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bokaro at Chas on the death of her husband Sudan Teli. Her case was that the (deceased) Sudan Teli while coming on his Hero Honda Motor Cycle on 9th July, 1991 at about 6.15 p.m. and reached near the Gate of I.O.L. at Village Salagadih, a Maruti Van bearing No. DNJ-2640 being run rashly coming from Dhanbad side dashed the Motor Cycle due to which the Motor Cycle was damaged. Sudan Teli was thrown on the road and succumbed to serious injury while taken to the Hospital.The case was registered as Title (M.V.) Suit No. 105/91. In the said case, the learned Additional District Judge, Bokaro taking into consideration t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : AIR2006Jhar29; I(2006)DMC55; [2005(4)JCR191(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this application under Section 151(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure the petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.2.2005 passed by the District Judge, Seraikella in Misc. Case No. 2 of 2005 whereby he has dismissed the Misc. case filed by the petitioner for setting aside the decree passed in Matrimonial Suit No. 5 of 2001.2. The opposite party, who is husband of the petitioner, filed an application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The said application was registered as Matrimonial Case No. 5 of 2001. It appears that the relationship of the petitioner and the opposite party, who were married in 1999, became worst and they started living separately: Out of the said wedlock, a son was born in 2000. After hearing the parties, the learned District Judge passed an order on 6.9.2001 for dissolution of the marriage and the decree was prepared. The petitioner, who is the wife, however f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : [2003(3)JCR663(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. 1. The Bokaro Steel Ltd. was incorporated in the year 1961 under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 for establishing a steel plant in the undivided State of Bihar. A large number of engineering, managerial, legal and clerical staff were employed and other workers were engaged. Even at the project stage in the year 1962, the employees of the establishment formed a co-operative society known as the 'Bokaro Steel Product Employees Co-operative Consumers Store, Ltd.. It was subsequently registered under the Bihar Co-operative Societies Act and its registration no was BGS 1/73. The society was registered with the object of (sic) the common interest of its members and for providing various facilities of to the members of the Constitution of the Co-operative Society was subsequently changed by amending the bye-laws and it came to be known as The Bokaro Steel City Central Consumers Co-operative Stores Ltd.' (hereinafter referred to as the 'Society). The society i...
Tag this Judgment!