Rajasthan Court September 1997 Judgments
Smt. Sunder Kanwar Vs. the Board of Revenue
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)WLC585; 1997(2)WLN490
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant case, the writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 15th March 1989, passed in Appeal No. 717/84/ceiling/Jalore by the Board of Revenue for the State of Rajasthan at Ajmer.2. The petitioners submitted before the Board of Revenue that original assessee Sri Jeev Raj Singh who has been substituted by his son Ratan Singh had sold the land in 1965 and from the said transferor the petitioner purchased this land in 1979. The land purchased by them, has been acquired by the respondent No. 1 State under the provisions of the imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 read with provisions of Chapter III/B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. Before the Board of Revenue only point urged by the petitioners, was regarding their right to be heard and on that issue, the Board of Revenue after placing reliance on Full Bench Judgment of this Court reported in Kesa v. The State of Rajasthan 1987 RLW page 1, rejected the contention of the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Chiranjee Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)WLC560; 1997(2)WLN484
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. This petition Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenges the order dated 22.5.1996 whereby the learned Special Judge (E.G. Act) Cases at Jaipur stated the particulars of the offences under Clauses 8 and 10 of the Rajasthan Controlled Cloth (Sales & Distribution Control) Order, 1975, (the Order of 1975) and Section 9 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act) punishable Under Section 7 of the Act.3. Being of the opinion that is was necessary and expedient so to do for maintaining supplies of controlled cloth and securing its equal distribution and availability at fair prices the State Government, vide G.S.R. 87 dated 6.11.1975, made the order of 1975. Clause 3 of the said Order empowered the Commissioner, Food and Supplies, Rajasthan or an Authorised Officer, to authorise any person or body of persons to be an authorised wholesaler or a Control Cloth holder in respect of controlled cloth for purposes of the Order. The wholes...
Tag this Judgment!ishwar Lal Bhagat Ram and ors. Vs. Asulal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)WLC305; 1997(2)WLN276
M.G. Mukherji, C.J.1. This revisional application was directed against an order dated December 4, 1996 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Jodhpur in Civil Original case No. 270/95 whereby he closed the right of cross-examination in respect of the plaintiff. The defendants-No. 2, 3 and 4 are the petitioners before us. The suit was for a money claim for Rs. 9,656. In the suit the statement of the plaintiff has been recorded and his examination-in-chief is complete and the case was fixed for cross-examination of the plaintiff on 4.12.1996.2. It is the contention of the defendants that the plaintiff opposite party M/s Asulal and Sons has wrongly joined the petitioners and they contested their liability inter alia contending that the firm defendant No. 2 M/s Ishwar Lal Bhagat Ram of which Bhagat Ram and Nathmal are the partners are not liable for the alleged guarantee given by their another partner Purshottam Das as the guarantee was in his individual capacity for...
Tag this Judgment!Rukma Devi and ors. Vs. Ramavtar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ1203
D.C. Dalela, J.1. This is a claimants' appeal against the judgment and award dated 18.5.1996 of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur, (for short 'the learned Tribunal') in respect of an accident which took place on 3.1.1993 involving a truck RNG 2696. In the accident, Mool Chand died. The age of the deceased, according to the learned Tribunal, was 28 at the time of the accident. According to the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the multiplier at this age should be at 18.2. Having regard to the future advancement and increase in the earning, the learned Tribunal has estimated the gross income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- p.m. Instead of taking this estimation, the learned Tribunal has calculated the income of the deceased on the basis of average income and came to the conclusion that the average income of the deceased was Rs. 2,250 p.m., although, on the basis of the advancement in the career and increase in the earning the learned Tribunal ...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Mahatma Vs. Sunil Mehta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)WLC106; 1998(1)WLN533
R.R. Yadav, J.1. The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for specific performance along with an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC for grant of temporary injunction. After hearing both the parties, the learned trial court refused to grant temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC.2. Aggrieved against the refusal of temporary injunction, the present Misc. Appeal was filed before this Court and while entertaining the appeal on 9.3.1994, the learned Single Judge of this Court ordered to issue notice on the stay application with following ad interim order, which reads thus:Meanwhile status quo in regard to the construction of the property as it existed today shall be maintained.3. It is alleged by the plaintiff-petitioner that summons as well as show cause notices were duly filed for service upon the answering non-petitioners and other respondents and the same were sent by the office vide despatch No. 1960/1961 dated 16.3.1994. The summons and notices were served upon...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak Gupta Vs. Santosh Kumar JaIn and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)WLC433; 1997(2)WLN468
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. In both these revisions order dated Feb. 2, 1995 of the learned Additional District Judge No. 2 Jaipur City whereby Shri Santosh Kumar and Shiv Kumar (for short the contemners) have been punished under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. Relevant farts giving rise to these revisions are that plaintiff Shri Deepak Gupta (for short the plaintiff) instituted a suit for permanent injunction against the contemners defendants (for short the contemners) in the trial court. Along with the suit an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC was also filed praying therein that the Central Circuit Cine Association may be restrained from de-registering M/s. Deepak Films and from cancelling their registration for distribution of film KOHRAM. Learned trial court passed an adinterim order directed to maintain status quo. Thereafter the plaintiff submitted another application under Section 151 CPC stating therein that inspite of the courts order maintaining statu...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanwar Lal Vs. Champa (Mst.)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1997
Reported in: I(1999)DMC264
A.S. Godara, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred Under Section 115, CPC by the petitioner-husband against the non-petitioner/wife Smt. Champa impugning order dated 12.4.1996 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Nimbahera in Civil Misc. Case No. 29/94 whereby the learned Trial Judge has ordered that the non-petitioner/wife be paid maintenance pendentelite at the rate of Rs. 450/- per month with effect from 12.4.1996 and besides, a sum of Rs. 800/- be also paid as costs of proceedings. The relationship between the parties is not a matter of dispute.2. Non-petitioner has moved an application Under Section 13, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') seeking divorce in the Trial Court and, during the pendency of the petition, she also moved an application duly supported by an affidavit Under Section 24 of the Act thereby requesting for grant of interim maintenance besides costs of proceedings to be paid by the petitioner-husband. The non-petitioner/wife allege...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Lal Vs. Rajasthan Housing Board and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Raj154; 1997(2)WLN531
ORDERJ.C. Verma, J. 1. In response to an advertisement for auction of plots in Saket Nagar Colony, Beawar, the petitioner had participated in the auction and was declared the highest bidder in respect of plot No. 7 @ 245/- per sq. meter. The plot No. 7 measured 164.79 Meters and the price of plot was assessed as Rs. 40,351.50/-. As per the conditions of the auction, the petitioner had deposited 25% of the cost of the plot on the same date vide receipt No. 83/96 of Book No. 83/1985. The petitioner had been waiting for a communication from the respondent-Housing Board and had even personally contacted the respondent No. 2 in his office. The petitioner had sent number of letters on 15-7-1991, 13-8-1991, 6-9-1991 and 27-2-1992. The petitioner have been praying for handing over the possession. The petitioner had even approached the District Forum, Ajmer, by filing a complaint. During the pendency of the complaint before the District Forum, the respondents vide letter dated 25-11-1992, accep...
Tag this Judgment!Renu Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1997
Reported in: 1998WLC(Raj)UC297; 1997(2)WLN438
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The petitioner is a divorcee woman. Her grievance is that she has been wrongly denied appointment as Teacher Grade III by the District Education Officer; Jhunjhunu. The factual position is not disputed. In pursuance to advertisement issued by the Director, Primary & Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner inviting applications from eligible candidates for the recruitment in the vacancies of Teacher Grade II and III for the year 1996-97, the petitioner applied for appointment as Teacher Grade III against the vacancies in Jhunjhunu District.2. The petitioner had requisite qualifications prescribed for the post. She was selected for appointment in the selection for appointment and her name was shown at S.No. 3 in merit list of reserve category 'Divorcee/Widow Women'. However, she was denied appointment on the ground that the decree of divorce was passed by mutual consent of the parties under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. From the pleadings it also transpires t...
Tag this Judgment!Moti Lal Sharma Vs. University of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-11-1997
Reported in: (1998)IILLJ1021Raj; 1998(1)WLC441
Arun Madan, J. 1. The short question which arises for consideration of this Court in this writ petition is as to whether consequent upon the retirement of the petitioner from services of the respondent University, whether it was open to the respondent university to withhold the post retiral statutory benefits as admissible to the petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation, i.e., provident fund and gratuity and such other consequential benefits to which he was entitled in accordance with law?2. The facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner was appointed as stenographer in the University of Rajasthan, Jaipur on September 3, 1966 and was allotted a residential quarter bearing No. M-7 by the Rajasthan University in the University, Campus and resided in the said quarter from 1979 to 1989- He retired from the services of the respondent-university on attaining the age of superannuation on September 30, 2989.3. The grievance of the peti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »