Rajasthan Court February 1993 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.
Gyan Chand Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3716
ORDERM.R. Calla, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 374, Cr. P. C. against the judgment and order dated 29th May, 1992 passed by Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer in Sessions Case No. 6/91 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1989 and he has been sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rupees 1,00,000/- and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2- 1/2 years.2. On 30th March, 1988, Circle Inspector Mr. Pratap Singh of Sadar Kotwali, Jaisalmer received a source information that the appellant keeps unauthorised opium and sells it, the opium was available in his house; in case search is taken immediately, opium can be recovered. Having received this source information, Mr. Pratap Singh recorded above information in Ex. P-10 and proceeded by a jeep to the house of the appellant along with other persons viz. Jeev Prakash P.W. 3, Dal Singh P.W. 4, Ghewar Singh and other consta...
Hangami Lal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)105
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. Heard.2. By the means of this writ petition the petitioners has prayed that the circular No. 2(4) Raj./4/90/37 dated 13/12/1991. (Annex. 4) issued by the Dy. Secretary to the Government, Revenue (Gr. 6) Department Rajasthan. Jaipur addressed to all the Collectors be quashed and the respondents be directed not to dispossess the petitioners from the disputed land and not to restrain them from performing seva-puja of the deity of temple Rikhebdeo situated in Village Antalia Tehsil Asind, District Bhilwara.3. It is alleged by the petitioner that they are agriculturists by profession and are also pujaris of he deity of temply Thakurji Rikhebdeo and that agricultural land bearing Khasra No. 603 measuring 19 Bishwas and Khasra no. 1242 measuring 8 Bighas 3 Bishwas situated in Village Antali has been recorded in the Khatedari of the said deity and petitioner Hangamilal has been shown as Pujaris thereof. In Jamabandis Samvat 2036 to 2039 and 2041 to 2044, this land has bee...
K.P. Misra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ1123Raj; 1993(1)WLC692
Inder Sen Israni, J. 1. This matter has come up for arguments on confirmation of ad interim stay order, which was granted in the year 1985. Since the matter has become quite old, it was finally heard with the consent of both the parties.2. It is submitted by Mr. Kasliwal, learned counsel, that the petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Cierk (LDC) in the Kota Cooperative Marketing Society Ltd. (respondent. No.2), vide order dated April 4, 1974. He is dealing with ministerial jobs, like accounts, general correspondence etc. It is further submitted that since the petitioner is doing job, which is ministerial in nature, he is not covered by the definition of term 'employee' as contained in Sub-section (9) of Section 2 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short, 'ESI Act'). It is also submitted that respondent No.2 is not a factory as defined in Sub-section (12) of Section 2 of the ESI Act. It is pointed out that, even though the petitioner has filed this writ petition in in...
State Bank of India Vs. Spintex Tubes and Constructions Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-10-1993
Reported in: [1995]82CompCas290(Raj); 1993(2)WLC236
I.S. Israni, J.1. An application dated May 5, 1992, under Section 446 read with Section 456 of the Companies Act, 1956, and Rules 6 and 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, has been filed by the Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. (RIICO), in which it has been prayed that leave be granted to the applicant-RIICO to remain outside the winding-up proceedings.2. An application has also been filed on behalf of the State Bank of India, stating therein that the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR), after conducting an enquiry under Section 16 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act, 1985'), vide its order dated May 10, 1991, has recorded the opinion under Section 20(1) of the Act, 1985, that it was just and equitable as also in public interest that the respondent-company should be wound up. This opinion was forwarded by the Registrar, BIFR t...
Oriental Power Cables Ltd. and ors. Vs. Registrar of Companies and ors ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-10-1993
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas447(Raj)
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This application under Section 633(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, has been filed by the petitioners. Petitioners Nos. 2 to 9 are directors and ex-directors of petitioner No. 1 company, The company was established for manufacturing, trading and/or dealing in wires, cables, lines of all kinds, conductors, mains, pipes, flexible cords, etc. In the application, detailed reasons have been given, on account of which, the company became sick and has remained closed since long. Since the company became sick, the matter was referred to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR). It has not been possible to write the books of account of the company needed by the BIFR, in spite of the efforts made-in this direction. Earlier, two company petitions, bearing Nos. 1 of 1987 and 1 of 1990, were filed, making the same prayer, as has been made in' the application under consideration. The aforesaid two applications were disposed of by this court, by a detailed ord...
Chhinder Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1616
Y.R. Meena, J.1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar dated 24-1-1985, whereby, he has convicted and sentenced the accused Chhindersingh for the offences under Sections. 302, 363, 376 and 201, IPC and also convicted ' and sentenced to accused Rajendrasingh for the offences under Sections. 363/34 and 366, IPC. Since both are connected appeals, hence, these appeals are disposed of by common judgment.2. Necessary facts to be noticed, in short, are that on intervening night of 17/18th October, 1983, accused Chhindersingh and Rajendrasingh came in the house of the complainant Daluram and kidnapped his daughter Sugani aged 14-15 years. Sugani along with his brother Badri was sleeping in the court-yard of the house. His brother Mohanlal along with his wife Pappi were sleeping in Kotha just adjacent to the courtyard of the house. The complainant Daluram was sleeping in front of the garage. The accused-appellants entered in ...
Dr. Jagdish Prasad Singhal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ759
Milap Chandra Jain, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 341, Cr.P.C. against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara dated August 31, 1992 by which he has directed that a complaint under Section 193, I.P.C. be filed against the witness-appellant Dr. Jagdish Prasad Singhal in the competent Court. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal may be summarised thus.2. In Criminal case No. 768/83 -- State v. Kishanlal and Dilip Nagar under Section 16 read with Section 7, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara, the appellant appeared as a prosecution witness and his statement was recorded. The accused were convicted. They filed an appeal in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara. While deciding the appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara Shri Budhmal Bhojak, held that the appellant has given false statement and directed that a notice be issued to him to show cause as to why a complaint under Section 193, I.P...
Ghanshyam Lal Mathur Vs. State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)102
R.S. Verma, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The case has a chequred history. The petitioner joined as Lower Division Clerk on 1.4.50 and was working in the Public Works Department. A seniority list dated 29.10.56 was issued to which his name was shown at Serial No. 135. Non-petitioners Chogalal Jain and Shri Dev Mitra were shown below him in the list. The seniority of the petitioner as LDC was maintained in the Gradation List dated 26.9.62 is had under the provisions of State Reorganisation Act, 1956. The petitioner went on deputation in the Education Department and served the said department from 19.1.56 to 18.6.64 but he was repatrinted in June, 1964 to his parent department and was taken back as substantive LDC while his two juniors namely said Shri Chogalal Jain and Shri Dev Mitra had been promoted on higher grade of a UDC with effect from 1.3.56. The petitioner made representations and was eventually promoted as substantive UDC with effect from 29.1.65 and his senior...
Maganlal and 13 ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)70
A.K. Mathur, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, filed by the petitioners for mandamus, directing the State of Rajasthan and other two respondents not to terminate their services and to regularise them on the ground that the termination of their services in the Directorate of the State Insurance and Provident Fund Department, was illegal and invalid. The termination was occasioned due to the selected candidates having become available to the said Directorate.2. In the same controversy, the matter was taken up to Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Surendra Kumar Gyani v. State of Rajasthan reported in AIR 1993 SC 115. In that case the Hon'ble Supreme Court negatived the contention of petitioner and disposed of the matter with following observation:In our view, it is only just and proper if a pragmatic and sympathetic consideration is made in respect of the appellant and the other petitioners in the Special Leave Petitions so that if they have got the requis...
Smt. Ambica Devi Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)101
A.K. Mathur, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that by an appropriate writ order or direction petitioner may be re-appointed to the post of teacher as she was holding at that time of her re-appointment from 1.1.1987 to 31.12.1988 and she may be paid her salary alongwith other allowances.3. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this writ petitions are that the petitioner was serving as a teacher at Gadra City in Tharparkar district of the erstwhile province of Sindh, now a part of Pakistan had to migrate to India on account of the disturbances and she became a displaced person. The petitioner was given appointment as a teacher in Jai Hind Sindhi Middle School, Gopalji ka Rasta, Jaipur on 1.11.1951 and served this school till 15.8.1981 when she was appointed on a post of teacher in Government School, Barmer vide order dated 13.8.1983. While serving there she received a letter on 13.7.83 that ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »