Rajasthan Jaipur Court March 2011 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.
Kailash C.Sharma and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1. Since bunch of petitions involve common question, at joint request, they are being finally decided at admission stage. Controversy arises for consideration in regard to interpretation of amendment notification dt.25/07/1995 whereby explanation has been added for the post of Laboratory Technician ("Lab. Tech.") in Column No.4 against entries at Sl.No.4 under the head "GROUP-A-VI {Para Medical Cadre (Medical)} of Schedule-I appended to the Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 ("Rules, 1965"). It is manifest from the record that since Year 2002 onwards, 9-months' Lab. Tech. training was substituted by 2-years training and academic qualification was changed from "Secondary" to Senior Secondary (Science); and thereafter, all applicants holding minimum academic qualification of Senior Secondary (Science), are holders of 2-Yrs' Lab. Tech. training from the institutions recognized by the Government and despite correspondence being made way back on 10/01/2003, the State...
M/S Kaso Chemie IndiA. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Commer.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1. This revision petition has been filed by the assessee under Section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 being aggrieved by the order of learned Tax Board dated 16/8/2004 allowing the Revenue's appeal and setting aside the order of first appellate authority dated 22/8/2000, whereby, the said first appellate authority Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Jaipur allowed the appeal of the assessee against the order passed by the Assessing Authority under Section 37 of the Act and allowed the application for rectification dated 29/2/2000 filed by the assessee, which was rejected by order dated 13/3/2000 of Assessing Authority.2. The learned Tax Board in its impugned order dated 16/8/2004 has held that question raised by the assessee in his application for rectification under Section 37 of the Act that the commodity manufactured and sold by him namely;P.U.Resin (Polyurethane Resin) was taxable only at the rate of 10% in residuary Entry and not at the rate of 16% under Entry No.91 of the Noti...
Kamal Prakash VermA. Vs. Authorised Officer,state Bank of India and an ...
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1.By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief:(i) an appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the respondent bank to give back he physical possession over the mortgaged property to petitioner and respondent further be directed not to publish any press note regarding the mortgage property and further respondents be directed not to initiate any auction proceedings of the mortgage property;(ii) an appropriate writ, order or direction be issued to respondents to revise the monthly installment as well as interest as per the actual release amount of petitioner housing loan account i.e. Rs. 5,00,000/- and the respondents be further directed to adjust the amount which was paid by the petitioner.(iii) Any other appropriate relief, which is deemed just and property, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.2. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that State Bank of...
Vikram Singh Ranawat and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
1. Instant bunch of petitions since involves common question as such being disposed of by the present order. It is not in dispute that all these writ petitioners are holding the post of Male Nurse Grade-II in substantive capacity and are members of Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965.2. The State Government in exercise of power conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution made rules regulating the recruitment to posts and conditions of service of persons appointed to the Rajasthan Rural Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules,2008 vide notification dt.18.02.2008 and u/R.5 options are being invited to be furnished within three month after commencement of these Rules by persons who are regularly recruited to the post specified in schedule appended to Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules,1965 and at the same time, the applicability of the Rules,2008 will be regarding the posts which falls within rural defined u/R.2(h) and Rule 5 regardi...
M/S Quippo Construction Equipment Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief:(i) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof quashing and setting aside the Proclamation dated 22-02-2011 issued by the Respondent No.2;(ii) that the petitioner has a prima facie strong case on merits as would be evident from the averments made in the writ petition.(iii)that an interim order of injunction may be passed restraining the respondents, their servants and agents, from giving any effect to and/or in pursuance of Proclamation dated 22-02-2011, and all proceedings thereunder and/or in pursuance thereof till the disposal of this writ application;2. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 entailed in the business of providing high value multipurpose, specialized and general infrastructure equipment on rental for spe...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Radha Devi
Court: Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-17-2011
G.S. Hora, Presiding Member. This appeal arises out of order dated 28.10.2009 passed by the District Consumer Forum (DCF), Nagaur whereby the Appellant Insurance Co. has been directed to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from 20.7.2009 to the date of payment besides Rs. 2,000/- as cost of litigation. The Life Assured (LA) was Late Shri Bhanwar Singh Choudhary who had obtained three policies by filling the proposal forms on 25.5.2006, 15.3.2007 and 30.3.2007. The policy amount was Rs. 3,50,000/-, Rs. 2,00,000/- and Rs. 2,00,000/- respectively. The policy holder died on 24.11.2007. A claim was filed by Smt. Radha Devi being the nominee but the claim for all the three policies were repudiated vide separate letters dated 7.4.2008 on the ground that the LA before submitting proposal forms had suffered from Kidney stone for which an operation was performed but he did not disclose this fact while taking the insurance policies, rather he gave fal...
Mukeshbhai Savjibhai Kalal (Patel). Vs. State of Gujarat.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-16-2011
1. Rule. Mr. U.A.Trivedi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-State. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is taken up for hearing today.2. This application is preferred under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, seeking regular bail by the applicant who came to be arrested in connection with C.R.No-III-5175/2009 registered with Bhiloda Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 66(1)(b), 65(A)(E), 116-B & 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act.2. Heard, Mr. Pravin Gondaliya, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. U.A.Trivedi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor at length and in great detail. Considering the role attributed to the applicant, which is reflected in the FIR at Annexure-A to the application, provisions of Sections 66(1)(b), 65(A)(E), 116-B & 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, quantum of punishment, criminal antecedents etc., I am of the view that the applicant deserve...
Ram Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-10-2011
1. On being charged with and convicted for the murder of four persons, namely; Manohar Singh, Nagu Singh, Inder Singh and Bapu Singh along with 22 other accused persons, the appellants have preferred this jail appeal against the judgment passed by the learned trial court on 13th February, 2004.2. Earlier, against the aforesaid impugned judgment passed by the learned trial court, the accused Kalu Lal, Inder Singh, Bal Chand, Suresh, Ram Prasad and Shri Ram had filed an appeal (313/2004). Another appeal (339/2004) against the judgment of the learned trial court was filed by Prahlad Singh, Babulal, Bhagwan Singh, Amar Singh, Bapu Lal, Kanti Ram and Ram Prasad. Co-accused Prithvi Singh, Jagdish, Man Singh, Nand Ram and Prahad had filed a separate appeal (385/2004). Likewise, an appeal (428/2004) was preferred by Bahadur Singh, Tanwar Singh and Man Singh. A separate appeal (1096/2004) was filed by Prahlad Singh against the judgment passed by the learned trial court. Though the present appel...
Jhabarmal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-10-2011
1. Above mentioned two appeals have been preferred by 13 accused persons in all (12+1) against two judgments dated 13.3.2000 and 15.1.2002 passed in Sessions case Nos.3/1999 and 36/2001 respectively by the Court of Addl. District Judge No.1, Sikar, arising out of Ex.P/7written report lodged at P.S. Kotwali, Sikar on 12.9.1998 at 10.30 am for the incident allegedly occurred at 10.00 am on the same day in the business market place of Janki Nath Market where deceased Bhebharam's shop was situated. APPEAL NO.129/2000 2. Accused Jhabar Mal, Jagdish Prasad @ J.P., Mahendra, Bajrang Lal, Hari Ram, Raju @ Rajesh Kumar, Sharwan Kumar, Tara Chand, Mohan, Kishan Singh, Madan Lal & Rohitash Kumar @ Sanjeev Kumar had been set up for trial in the first instance.3. Vide judgment dated 13.3.2000, the accused persons (appellants No.1 to 9 & 12) except accused Kishan Singh and Madan Lal (appellants No.10 & 11) had been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 147,148, 302/149, 307/149, 326/14...
Kailash Chand Jyotishi and anr. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Mar-08-2011
1. Counsel jointly submit that the petitioners have worked as Vidhyarthi Mitra in various government educational institutions, but after the policy of rationalization and equalization was introduced by the State Government, some were displaced from their places of posting and services of some of them were terminated since there was no post available where they were discharging their duties as Vidhyarthi Mitra. Counsel further submits that the controversy involved in the present petitions has been finally decided before the Main Seat at Jodhpur in Civil Writ Petition-8966/2009 (Prahlad Kumar Sharma v. State of Rajasthan & Ors) decided on 22/07/2010 with the following observations:-2. In view of aforesaid, these writ petitions are also disposed of in view of earlier decision of this Court by Single Bench as well as Division Bench and aforesaid quoted decisions of the State Government vide letter dtd.4.6.2010 and 26.6.2010 and the respondents shall continue the contract of employment of p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »