Rajasthan Court January 1997 Judgments
Smt. Paroo and ors. Vs. Likhma Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ628; AIR1997Raj202; 1997(2)WLC396; 1997(1)WLN437
V.S. Kokje, J.1. These appeals raise a common question as to whether the Insurance Company should have been held liable for compensating the claimants in respect of the accident to a goods vehicle in which the deceased were being carried at the time of the accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal' hereinafter) has held only the owner and the driver liable and has absolved Insurance Company of all liability. In each of these appeals, the Insurance Company has filed cross-objections as the sum of Rupees 50,000/- in each case, the Insurance Company had to pay as no fault liability was not directed to be reimbursed by the owner to it. The owner also filed cross-objections against the Insurance Company being absolved of the liability. The appeals and the cross-objections were heard together and are being decided by this common order.2. On November 8, 1996 at about 5.30 to 6.00 A.M. goods vehicle No. RJC 4009 capsized and turned turtle killing 12 labourers who we...
Tag this Judgment!C.D. Grover and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Raj281; 1997WLC(Raj)UC719
ORDERV.S. Kokje, J.1. Charan Das Grover, his mother Veera Devi and his two sons Devendra Grover and Ashok Grover were running a partnership business in the name of M/s. Green Hotel, Station Road, Bikaner. On July 8, 1995 this partnership deed was dissolved. Ashok Kumar brought a suit in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bikaner against three other partners praying for a permanent injunction restraining them from using and transferring the properties of the Firm. In this suit an application for temporary injunction was moved by plaintiff Ashok Kumar claiming a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from using the properties given in the list attached with the application till the accounts are settled between the parties. The plaintiff Ashok Kumar also moved an application for appointment of (sic) not transfer it without the consent of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was given a right to go on the premises for seeing the accounts of the dissolved firm during normal worki...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Chand and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2178
ORDERV.S. Kokje, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for dropping or quashing the proceedings under Sections 498A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jetaran in Regular Case No. 298/93. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of the case good sense prevailed in the minds of the parties and during the course of trial, they arrived at an amicable settlement and, therefore, both the parties do not desire that the prosecution should continue. As the offences are not compoundable the trial Court has refused to compound them. The learned Counsel has relied on several Single Bench decisions of this Court. In some of these cases, the trial Court was directed to grant permission to compound the offence and in some of them proceedings were quashed under Section 482, Cr. P.C. by this Court. Two questions, therefore, arise for determination in the case : (i) whether this Court ca...
Tag this Judgment!Satnamsingh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1778
P.C. Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15-3-1995 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar whereby the accused-appellant Satnamsingh was held guilty of the offence under Section 302, IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for life together with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. The prosecution case, as unfolded at the trial, may be stated as follows. On 26-8-1992 at about 10.55 P.M. deceased Munir Khan was coming from the side of the Police Station and was going to his house on his Priya Scooter. He was proceeding on the extreme left of the Road. When he reached near Anand Chhabra's Clinic on the Suratgarh-Bikaner Road, the accused who was waiting for Munir Khan near the Office of the Public Works Department Majdoor Union, sat on his Truck No. RSC 1313 and drove it behind Shri Munir Khan at a very fast speed. He wanted to intentionally crush Munir Khan under the t...
Tag this Judgment!Munna Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ3095; 1998(1)WLC575; 1997(1)WLN367
ORDERM.A.A. Khan, J.1. This petition Under Section 482, Cr. P.C. seeks cancellation of the First Information Report No. 43 of 1995 registered at Police Station Jalupura, Jaipur on February 3, 1995 for offences Under Sections 406,420, IPC against (1) Fazlur Rehman, (2) Munna, the petitioner and (3) Nazir Khan A.S.I. The facts and circumstances, leading to the registration of the said FIR may briefly be stated as under:-2. On February 3, 1995 one Smt. Shamim Khan, the informant, presented a written complaint at P.S. Jalupura alleging therein that she had been residing as a tenant at a rent of Rs. 500/- p.m. in Plot No. 6 admeasuring 126.77 59 yards situate at Jalupura Mohalla for the last 10-12 years, that Fazlur Rehman, the owner-landlord verbally agreed to sell the said plot to her and promised to execute a registered sale deed in her favour and also received some amount by way of advance money 2 years before his going to Haj pilgrimage some times back and though he continued to assure...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Nazara and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC550; 1997(1)WLN426
V.S. Kokje, J.1. These cases arise out of an unfortunate accident which took place in the town of Phalodi because of derailment of a goods train which fell down on a public road killing two persons and injuring some others. The heirs and successors of the deceased as also the injured persons themselves, filed claim applications before the Railway Claims Tribunal for short the 'Tribunal' hereinafter). On preliminary objections being raised by the Railway Administration, the Tribunal went into the question as to whether it had jurisdiction to entertain the claim applications and held that it had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. These misc. appeals have been filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) against the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal.2. The learned Counsel for the appellants heavily relied on a decision of Division Bench of Kerala High Court in Vijayasankar v. Union of India 1996 (1) CCC 157 (H.C.) and contended t...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)WLN158
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The main prayen in the writ petition is thus:It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the record of the matter may kindly be called for and examined, and writ of mandamus may be issued against respondents directing them to make arrangements for opening the lock of the Panchayat office and make available all the record of Panchayat to the petitioner as well as the Panchayat Body and further to take action against the Secretary Shri Bihari Lal Sharma, respondent No. 6 in pursuance of his mis-conduct and in failure in performing his statutory duties and also take action in pursuance of enquiry report of Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dausa dated 16.1.96.2. The above grievance can be properly enquired into by the Disciplinary Authority and if necessary, action can be taken against the erring Gram Panchayat Secretary. In view of this, the petition is disposed of in the following terms(i) that the petitioner shall be free to make a representation/complaint before the...
Tag this Judgment!Maharban Singh Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC482; 1997(1)WLN304
J.C. Verma, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as work charge Nakedar in February, 1963 under the Directorate of Mines and Geology. In the year 1973, the Governor of Rajasthan had ordered for conversion of existing posts of Nakedars into that of Lower Division Clerks (for short as LDC), resultingly after the abolition of the posts of Nakedars 231 posts of LDC, were created in the scale of Rs. 110-230. The petitioner who fulfilled the qualifications as prescribed for the post of LDC, was appointed as LDC vide Annex. 1 w.e.f. 1.10.1973 and was confirmed on the said post on 14.10.1982 vide Annex. 2, attached with the writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly number of other employees who were initially working as Nakedars were also appointed as LDCs because of the conversion of the posts to the post of LDC after abolition of the post of Nakedars. The petitioner has attached the list of certain persons.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite t...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Chand and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC587; 1997(1)WLN415
V.S. Kokje, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for dropping or quashing the proceedings under Section 498A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jetaran in Regular Case No. 298/93. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of the case good sense prevailed in the minds of the parties and during the course of trial, they arrived at an amicable settlement and, therefore, both the parties do not desire that the prosecution should continue. As the offences are not compoundable the trial court has refused to compound them. The learned Counsel has relied on several Single Bench decisions of this Court. In some of these cases, the trial Court was directed to grant permission to compound the offence and in some of them proceedings were quashed under Section 482 Cr. P.C. by this Court. Two questions, therefore, arise for determination in the case: (i) whether this Court can direct...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Vs. Pema Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC647; 1997(1)WLN418
P.C. Jain, J.1. This appeal, under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, is directed against the Award dated 4.2.1991 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Balotra whereby the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation to. the claimant-respondent No.l Pemaram on account of the death of his wife.2. The relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal may briefly be stated as follows: On 28:3.1988, at about 9.00AM, Mst. Manthari was proceeding towards SDOT Road and when she reached near the shop of Makaram Mali, she was fatally hit from behind by Tractor No. RNJ 7154 which was being, driven rashly and negligently by the driver Shaft Mohd, who was working under the employment of respondent No. 2 Pokarram. She was taken to the Hospital in a precarious condition and there she succumbed to her injuries.3. Claimant Pemaram, who is the son of Mst. Manthari, filed a Claim Petition under Section 410-A of the Act and claimed compensation to th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »