Rajasthan Court March 1997 Judgments
Modern Threads (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-31-1997
Reported in: [1998]230ITR598(Raj); 1997(2)WLC692; 1997(1)WLN348
Anshuman Singh, J.1. The facts giving rise to this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India briefly stated are that the petitioner Modern Threads (India) P. Ltd., is a company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at A-4, Vijay Path, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur. The said company is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of synthetic yarn, woollen yarn, etc. For manufacturing of the aforesaid goods, the company is alleged to have entered into an agreement with Technimont, S.P.A. Milan of Italy, for the supply of technical know-how and basic process engineering documentation on December 15, 1995. As per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner has agreed to pay 300 lakhs US dollars to the foreign collaborator for the supply of technical know-how and 35 lakhs US dollars for the supply of basic process engineering documentation. The said agreement is also alleged to have been approved by the Government of India, vide l...
Tag this Judgment!Modern Threads (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-31-1997
Reported in: (1997)139CTR(Raj)469
JAIPUR BENCHANSHUMAN SINGH, J. :The facts giving rise to this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India briefly stated are : that the petitioner M/s Modern Threads (India) (P) Ltd. is a company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at A-4, Vijay Path, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur. The said company is a public limited company engaged in manufacture of synthetic yarn, woolen yarn, etc. For manufacturing of the aforesaid goods, company is alleged to have entered into an agreement with M/s Technimont, S. P. A. Milan of Italy for the supply of Technical know-how and basic process engineering documentation on 15th Dec., 1995. As per the term of the agreement the petitioner has agreed to pay 300 lacs US Dollar to the foreign collaborator for the supply of technical know-how and 35 lacs US Dollar for the supply of basic process engineering documentation. The said agreement is also alleged to have been approved by the Government of India vide l...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Chand and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-28-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)WLC633; 1997(1)WLN326
A.K. Parihar, J.1. An advertisement dated 03.10.1994 was issued by Rajasthan Public Service Commission for the posts of Assistant Engineers (Civil/Mechanical/Electrical) for three departments namely; P.W.D., P.H.E.D. and Irrigation, under the provisions of Rajasthan State Engineering Service (Direct Recruitment by Combined Competitive Examination) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Rules of 1991'). In the said advertisement 65 posts were notified for Assistant Engineer (Civil) in Public Works Department. The last date for submission of application forms was 23/11/1994 which was extended upto 17/01/1995. The written examination was held from 27/6/1995 to 29/6/1995.2. The appellant being eligible for the post, also applied in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the Commission and was allowed to appear in the written Examination. The result of the written Examination was declared on 23/12/1995 and successful candidates were called for interview which were held from 25/3/...
Tag this Judgment!Sumiti Roop Chand Bhandari Vs. Himmat Mal Giriya
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-28-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)WLC113; 1997(1)WLN618
R.R. Yadav, J.1. The present contempt petition stems from summary dismissal of Second Appeal No. 117/93 on 18.8.93 allowing one year's time to tenant contemner for vacating the suit shop from the date of dismissal of the Second Appeal provided he furnished an undertaking to the effect that he will hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit shop on or before 18th August, 1994 and further that he will not part with or deliver the possession of the suit-shop to any other person than the land lord. The tenant contemner was further to undertake that he will pay to the land lord mesne profits for use and occupation of the premises at the rate at which rent was payable in respect of suit premises regularly month by month until he physically delivered the vacant possession of the suit-shop to the land lord. The tenant-contemner was directed to execute the undertaking within 1 month from the date of the order in the executing court.2. Indisputably, the tenant-contemner even after exec...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Smt. Bhanwari Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-28-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC473; 1997(1)WLN625
B.R. Arora, J.1. Respondent Smt. Bhanwari Devi was elected as the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Ribia, Panchayat Samiti, Churu in the election held in the month of February 1995. On 14-3-96 a complaint was made against her by one Shri Paras Ram before the Chief Executive Officer cum Secretary, Zila Parishad, Churu that by giving birth to one additional child on 2.2.96 raising the number of her children to more than two, Smt. Bhanwari Devi has incurred the disqualification under Section 19(1)(iv) of the Act to continue as the Sarpanch. Alongwith the complaint, Shri Paras Ram submitted the Birth Certificate (Annexure. Rule 2) and the Certificate (Annexure. R,3) in proof of giving birth to a child by Smt. Bhanwari Devi.2. The Chief Executive Officer thereafter appointed the Vikas Adhikari to hold an enquiry and after completion of enquiry the Notice dated 15.5.96 (Annexure. Rule 4) under Section 39(2) of the Act was issued to Smt. Bhanwari Devi to show cause why she may not be declared 'dis...
Tag this Judgment!Kamlesh Kumari Vs. Laxmi Kant
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: II(1997)DMC143; 1997(3)WLC322
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. 'The children are not mere chattels; nor are they mere play things for their parents. Absolute right of parents over the destinies and the lives of their children has, in the modern changed social conditions, yielded to the considerations of their welfare as human beings so that they may grow up in the normal balanced manner to be successful members of the society and the Guardian Court in case of a dispute between the mother and father, is expected to strike a just, and proper balance between the requirements of welfare of the minor children and the rights of their respective parents over them.'These observations were made by the Apex Court in Rosy's case (AIR 1973 SC 2090). In the light of these directions, I proceed to consider the welfare of the minor child Pooja and the rights of her parents Kamlesh Kumari and Laxmi Kant (appellant and respondent in this appeal) over her.Back Ground Facts2. First the facts. Appellant and respondent were married on May 17, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Board of Secondary Education Vs. Manohar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: II(1997)ACC37; 1999ACJ193; 1997(3)WLC434
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment dated 29.4.1992 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, District Ajmer (for short 'the Commissioner') whereby petition under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') was allowed and Manohar, the claimant-respondent No. 1 was awarded Rs. 1,42,074 as compensation. Background Facts2. The facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass. Respondent No. 1 (for short 'Manohar') initiated proceedings under Section 10 of the Act before the Commissioner stating therein that respondent No. 2 (for short 'Shiv Dutt') got the contract of whitewashing from the appellant (for short the 'Board') and engaged workers. On 2.12.1993 Manohar fell down while whitewashing the top floor of the building as a result of which he was severely injured and his right leg was completely amputated, therefore he became unfit to do any work. Manohar claimed Rs. 42,000 as compensation. In the reply Shiv Dutt stated that...
Tag this Judgment!Mishrilal Vs. Kamla and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: II(1998)ACC241; 1999ACJ1533
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Where the insured has taken all precautions by appointing a duly licensed driver to drive the vehicle in question and it has not been established that it was the insured who allowed the vehicle to be driven by a person not duly licensed, due to which the accident occurred, then the insurance company cannot repudiate its statutory liability under Sub-section (1) of Section 96 (Section 149 of new Act) on the ground of contravention of condition in policy excluding its liability in case of vehicle being driven by a person not duly licensed. While interpreting the contract of insurance, the Tribunals and courts have to be conscious of the fact that right to claim compensation by heirs and legal representatives of the victims of the accident, is not defeated on technical grounds.These observations were made by the Apex Court in Sohan Lal Passi v. P. Sesh Reddy, 1996 ACJ 1044 (SC). In the light of these directions I proceed to consider the core question which arises i...
Tag this Judgment!Muktilal Vs. Chief Secretary Govt. of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC399; 1997(1)WLN346
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. A suit for permanent Injunction was filed by the petitioner in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) Shahpura. The said court invoking the provisions contained in Section 40 of the Rajasthan Municipality Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) forwarded the suit to the court of District Judge, Jaipur District vide order dated November 30, 1996. Against this order present action for filing the revision has been resorted to. During the course of argument, I have been taken through another order dated December 30, 1996 passed by the learned District Judge, Jaipur district whereby the case was further transferred to the court of Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur District, Jaipur.2. It appears from the perusal of the plaint that Muktilal, the present petitioner who was an elected ward member instituted a civil suit for permanent injunction seeking relief against the defendants, restraining them from removing him from the post of ward member. The election o...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)WLC631; 1997(1)WLN374
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. On Nov. 16, 1988 Munshi informant lodged a written first Information Report with Police Station Vazeerpur Distt. Sawai Madhopur alleging therein that on Nov. 8, 1988 when he checked his iron safe kept in his residential house at village Choli udai he found the gold and silver ornaments which were kept in the safe, missing therefrom. On making inquiries he came to know from his somewhat mentally weak son, Megh Raj that the petitioner and Brij Mohan co-accused by making false representation to Megh Raj of getting employment in Railways for him, dishonestly and fraudulently induced him to deliver the gold and silver ornaments worth about Rs. 35,000/-to them Crime No. 124/88 was registered by the police and after investigation a police report for offences u/ss 454, 380, 406, 420 read with Section 120B I.P.C. was submitted on 24.4.89 in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gangapur City, against the present petitioners and the aforesaid Brij Mohan. 2. Alongwi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »