Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: jharkhand Year: 2004 Page 1 of about 79 results (0.004 seconds)

May 14 2004 (HC)

Sonali Mehta @ Sonali Devi and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : May-14-2004

Reported in : 2005CriLJ1559; [2004(2)JCR577(Jhr)]

..... .3. learned counsel appearing for the petitioners pointed out that petitioner no. 1 sonali mehta after the death of her husband was driven out from her sasural, but due to mediation of well wishers she was again brought to her in-laws house on 31.1.2002 and she stayed there till 12.2.2002 and when she filed an affidavit ..... and other family members (annexure-5). on 26.2.2002 a joint compromise petition was filed on behalf of both the parties as good feeling has been restored with the mediation of the well wishers and c.p. case no. 54 of 2002 was withdrawn (annexure-6 and 6/1). the same day she was married with complainant of the case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2004 (HC)

Suresh Verma and Puran Verma and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jhar ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Jun-23-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)BLJR1541; 2005CriLJ1565; II(2004)DMC806; [2006(1)JCR215(Jhr)]

..... not specifically been named in their evidence. the evidence of these witnesses is that only appellant suresh verma in criminal appeal no. 512 of 1997 along with rohit verma, the mediator of marriage, had been to the house of the informant at village bhandaro, p.s. sarwan and had demanded rs. 5000/-. on refusal appellant suresh verma had threatened to meet ..... gets support by the medical evidence of dr. ashok kumar chatterjee (pw 5). relying the evidence, he convicted all these three appellants in both the criminal appeals, whereas acquitted the mediator rohit verma who is of another village and is not related with these appellants in both the criminal appeals, rather his role was only as marriage negotiator in solemnizing the ..... 14th december, 1994, all the appellants in both the criminal appeals and acquitted accused mediator rohit were assured and asked not to torture purni devi for money. informant suspected that all the named accused including these appellants due to non-fulfilment of dowry demand of ..... well, appellant suresh verma fled away.4. informant has alleged that two months prior to the alleged occurrence, appellant suresh verma had gone to his home along with rohit verma, mediator, and had demanded rs. 5000/-. on refusal, brother-in-law of the informant started harassing and torturing his sister threatening that the result will be worst. four days prior to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 2004 (HC)

Pushpa Kumari (Smt.) Vs. Parichhit Pandey @ Ashutosh Pandey and anr.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-24-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)BLJR486; [2005(1)JCR134(Jhr)]

..... between the two is admitted. it is further stated that marriage was negotiated one and the own nephew of the respondent no. 2 mahesh tiwary who is an advocate was mediator in negotiation of the marriage. but parents of the plaintiff suppressed the material facts regarding character, status, nature and mental balance of the plaintiff. the fact is that after three ..... back to her husband's house till date. on the other, it is alleged that this being a negotiated marriage and nephew of nirmal tiwary (respondent no. 2) was the mediator and he and his father-in-law have suppressed the fast regarding character, status, nature and mental balance of the plaintiff-respondent. it is alleged that this plaintiff- respondent who .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 19 2004 (HC)

Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : May-19-2004

Reported in : [2004(4)JCR210(Jhr)]

..... ;c. non occupancy raiyats i.e. raiyats not having such a right of occupancy;d. raiyats having khunt katti rights; ande. under raiyats i.e. tenants holding whether immediately or mediately under raiyats and mundari khunt kattidars.9. the word 'tenure holder' under section 6 of the chotanagpur tenancy act, means primarily a person who has acquired from the proprietor or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 2004 (HC)

State of Jharkhand and ors. Vs. Arjun Das

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Oct-05-2004

Reported in : 2004(3)BLJR1998; [2004(4)JCR535(Jhr)]

m.y. eqbal, j.1. this appeal at the instance of the appellant- the state of jharkhand is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.8.2003 passed in wp (c) no. 5126 of 2002 whereby the learned single judge directed the appellants to mutate the name of the petitioner-respondent in respect of the land in question.2. the fact of the case lies in a narrow compass.3. petitioner-respondent alleged to have purchased raiyati land measuring an are of 3 kathas appertaining to mouza dhaiya no. 6. khata no. 119. plot no. 4051 from one mohan manjhi son of late gangu manjhi a scheduled tribe by registered sale-deed dated 2.12.1988. it is stated by the petitioner-respondent that after purchase he came in peaceful possession of the said land and continuing possession since the date of purchase. petitioner-respondent, therefore filed an application for mutation of the land in question by entering his name in the revenue register but the circle office, dhanbad sat tight over the matter, the petitioner then filed a writ petition being wp (c) no. 3921 of 2001 for a direction to the respondent-circle officer, dhanbad to mutate the land in his favour. the writ petition was disposed of on 24.8.2001 with a direction to the circle officer to pass appropriate order on the mutation application after hearing the parties. it is alleged that the circle officer without making any inquiry with regard to possession of the land rejected the application on the ground that transfer of the land itself was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2004 (HC)

Manohar Lal JaIn Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Jun-23-2004

Reported in : [2004(3)JCR362(Jhr)]

tapen sen, j.1. in this writ application the petitioner, who is the manager of 'sri digambar jain bispanthi kothi' at madhuban in the district of giridih, has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 6.5.2002 as contained in annexure-7 passed by the respondent no. 2 in misc. revision case no. 14/2000 allowing the revision filed by the respondent no. 6. the ground for making the said prayer is that commissioner, north chhotanagpur division, hazaribagh (respondent no. 2) had no jurisdiction to entertain a second revision under the bihar tenants' holding (maintenance of record) act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity and precision as the said act).2. let it be recorded that by reason of the impugned order, the respondent no. 2 observed as follows :--'though the op claims to be in possession but they failed to adduce any evidence to the effect as to how they obtained the ownership over the land in dispute. they even failed to adduce evidence about legal possession over the land in dispute. from records it transpires that entire claim of op is based on forged and fabricated documents i.e. hukumnama and government rent receipt. mere possession does not confer any right and title to them to hold the land in dispute, when the same is encircled from all directions by the land of the petitioners. it is well established that any government land cannot be claimed by any individual or organization only because some revenue officer has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 2004 (HC)

State of Jharkhand Vs. Mithila Sahkari Grih Nirman Sahyog Samiti and o ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Dec-13-2004

Reported in : 2005(2)BLJR973; [2005(1)JCR329(Jhr)]

order1. a proceeding under section 4(h) of the land reforms act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the act) was initiated by the deputy commissioner, ranchi for cancellation of settlement of land in question. after notice to a dead person, namely, late ishwar dayal singh, it was cancelled vide order dated 3rd june, 2002. the writ petitioner/respondent whose members were in possession of the land and claimed ownership of the land, moved in appeal. the commissioner, south chhotanagpur division, ranchi rejected the appeal vide order dated 2nd july, 2002. the aforesaid order when challenged by the writ petitioner/respondent in w.p. (c) no. 4320 of 2002, the learned single judge vide impugned order dated 25th april 2003 allowed the writ petition.2. the main plea taken by the appellant is that the land, in question, was illegally transferred in favour of ishwar dayal singh for the purpose of defeating the provisions of land reforms act.3. the brief fact of the case is that one jagdish prasanna nath sahdeo was recorded khewatdar of the land of khata no. 119 and khata no. 113 of village bazra, p.s. ranchi (now known as sukhdeo nagar). the said landlord settled 22.75 acres of land comprised within r.s. plot no. 227 under khata no. 919 and 9.18 acres comprising within r.s. plot no. 228 of khata no. 113 in favour of ishwar dayal singh by delivery of possession, followed by soda hukumnama issued on 2nd february, 1952. on payment, rent receipts were also issued in favour of ishwar dayal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 2004 (HC)

Mahendra Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Sep-10-2004

Reported in : 2004(3)BLJR1701; [2004(4)JCR254(Jhr)]

orderm.y. eqbal, j.1. in this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 19.11.1994 passed by respondent no. 4 directing restoration of the land of the petitioner in favour of respondent nos. 5 to 9 under section 46 (4-a) of the chotanagpur tenancy act (in short 'cnt act') and also the order dated 26.9.2000 passed by respondent no. 2 in restoration revision no. 140/1996 whereby he has allowed the revision and quashed the order of the appellate authority upholding restoration of land in favour of the said respondent.2. the facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.the land of khata no. 192 of village bongabar was recorded as a raiyati land in the name of bahira munda and after his death the land was jointly inherited by his two sons, raghubir munda and jhabu munda. jhabu munda died issueless and after his death raghubir munda became the sole raiyat of the land. raghubir munda died leaving behind four sons who, by hukumnama dated 1.3.1946, alleged to have settled the land with one chhangilal agarwal and put him is possession of the said land. in 1960 chhangilal agarwal filed title suit no. 42 of 1960 for declaration that he has acquired valid and perfect title and possession over the aforesaid land. the suit was decreed on 2.5.1960 in terms of compromise petition filed by chandgi lal agarwal and all the sons of raghubir munda. later on changilal agarwal sold the aforesaid land to one kamta prasad singh who, in turn, sold the said land to the father of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 2004 (HC)

Lilawati Sahun Vs. Madan Sahu and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Apr-02-2004

Reported in : [2004(2)JCR428(Jhr)]

vishnudeo narayan, j.1. this appeal at the instance of the defendant appellant has been preferred against the impugned judgment and decree dated 9.6.1989 and 19.6.1989 passed in title appeal no. 1 of 1989 by shit b.k. dubey, district judge, gumla whereby and whereunder the judgment and decree dated 12.12.1988 and 21.12.1988 respectively passed in title suit no. 20 of 1986 by munsif, gumla were set aside and appeal was allowed declaring the title in respect of four plots also in favour of the plaintiffs-respondent.2. the plaintiff-respondent paras sahu (since dead) had filed title suit no, 20 of 1986 for declaration, of his title in respect of plot nos. 1704, 2104, 2140, 2201, 2202 and 2745 appertaining to revisional survey khata no. 38 fully detailed in schedule a of the plaint. the trial court had decreed the suit in part declaring the title of the said plaintiff-respondent in respect of plot no. 1704 and 2202 only. the plaintiff-respondent filed title appeal no. 1 of 1989 whereby his title over plot nos. 2104, 2140, 2201 and 2745 was declared by the impugned judgment under this appeal and as such title of the plaintiff-respondent on the entire suit land stands declared in his favour.3. the case of the plaintiff-respondent 1st party (hereinafter referred to as the respondent), in brief, is that khata no. 38 of village kasira ps gumla, district ranchi (now district gumla) stands recorded in the name of gujru sahu and bigna sahu and there had been a partition between the said .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 17 2004 (HC)

Krishna Kumar Mahato and ors. Vs. Sukhlal Rewani and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Aug-17-2004

Reported in : [2005(1)JCR231(Jhr)]

vikramaditya prasad, j.1. in this second appeal the substantial question of law, to be answered is :-'whether the gift of public in general is valid ?'while framing the aforesaid question at the time of admission the appellants had been given liberty to raise other substantial questions of law, if available, at the time of hearing of this appeal. taking advantage of this liberty one substantial question has been raised :-whether or not a gift can be made for creating a samshanghat in contravention of law i.e. .municipal act or the panchayat raj act ?2. the question aforesaid arose out of the following facts : one haripada mahato executed a deed of gift (ext. c) to 21 per- sons for the purpose of creation of a samshanghat as people of that area were feeling difficulty in disposing of the dead bodies. that deed of gift was attested, registered and that was produced in the court by one of those 21 persons. it also transpires that a mutation petition was filed by those 21 persons but that was rejected. thereafter, both the parties i.e. the appellants and those 21 persons preferred appeals before the revenue authorities and the appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed whereas the appeal of those 21 persons was allowed. consequently, the mutation was made in favour of those 21 persons. further some relevant facts are that the land which is in dispute appertains to plot no. 237, khata no. 171, having an area 0.35 decimals in chitarpur, police station topchanchi, district dhanbad .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //