Rajasthan Court January 1998 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.
Smt. Aqeela Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-17-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)WLC321; 1998(1)WLN33
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant appeal has been filed against the common judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 2.12.1997 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5592/92 challenging the termination of the services of the petitioner-appellant vide order dated 27.3.1991 and also claiming regularisation of her service, and in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3461/1994 challenging the order dated 12.5.1994 terminating the services of the appellant as the appellant had been reinstated in terms of the interim order of this Court dated 22.10.1992.2. The facts, giving rise to this appeal, are that the appellant passed her Secondary School examination in the year 1975 from the Board of Secondary Education. Rajasthan, Ajmer and obtained the Diploma in Needle Work and Tailoring from the Rajasthan Mahila Vidhyalaya, Udaipur in the year 1977. The appellant was appointed on the post of Primary School Teacher by the Panchayat Samiti, Jhadol vide order dated 26.9.1984 on temporary basis for a ...
Govind Singh and ors. Vs. Man Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Raj22; 1999(2)WLC218; 1998(1)WLN88
ORDERA.S. Godara, J. 1. This Revision Petition has been preferred under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') against the appellate order dated 7-2-96 passed by the Civil Judge (SD), Rajsamand in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 3/91 thereby setting aside the order dated 13-8-87 passed in Civil Misc. Case No. 10/87 by the then Munsif, Bhim in Civil Original Case No. 33/75. 2. Briefly stated, the facts relevant for disposal of this petition are that the plaintiff Udai Singh (since deceased), whose sons, widow and daughter are petitioners before this Court, brought a suit for pre-emption of the agricultural land which was sold by the defendant-non-petitioner Vijay Singh to the defendant-non-petitioners Man Singh and Keshar Singh who are real brothers and are residents of Village Sadaran, before the trial Court on 10-2-75. The summonses were accordingly issued to the defendant-non-petitioners for their appearance on 8-8-75. The summonses so issued to the defendant-non-petiti...
Dhan Bai Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: I(1999)DMC538; 1999(2)WLC149; 1998(1)WLN23
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant Misc. petition impugns the order dated July 8, 1997 of the learned Sessions Judge, Alwar whereby criminal revision preferred by the non-petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 (for short the accused) was allowed and cognizance of offences under Sections 494 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code taken by the Special Judicial Magistrate, Alwar against the accused on February 23, 1993 was set aside.2. The complainant-petitioner (for short the complainant) instituted a complaint against the accused under Sections 494 and 120B of Indian Penal Code in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Alwar on November 5, 1992. Learned Magistrate forwarded the complaint under Section 156(3), Criminal Procedure Code to Police Station, Pratapgarh for investigation. A report, after investigation was filed by the police station and the learned Magistrate on February 23, 1993 took cognizance of the offences under Sections 494 and 120B, Indian Penal Code against the accused persons. The said ord...
Soorajmal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1515; 1998(3)WLC138
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.2. By this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. it is prayed that the order dated 4-11-1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur in criminal revision No. 12/97 and the order dated 5-8-1997 passed by the learned S.D.M., Jodhpur in criminal case No. 234/96 State v. Soorajmal and another be quashed and set aside.3. By the above mentioned order dated 5-8-1997 passed by the learned S.D.M., the application filed by the petitioners under Section 148 Cr.P.C. was rejected. The order dated 5-8-1997 of the learned S.D.M. was upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and the revision petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed.4. Section 148(1) Cr.P.C. provides that:Whenever a local inquiry is necessary for the purpose of Section 145, Section 146 or Section 147, a District Magistrate or Sub-divisional Magistrate may depute any Magistrate subordinate to him to make the inquiry, and may furn...
Prabhawati Vatnanbhai and ors. Vs. Chairman, U.P. State Road Transport ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ640
D.C. Dalela, J.1. It is alleged that on 31.8.1981, the deceased boarded the bus No. URC 9641 belonging to Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, for going to Nathdwara from Vrindaban. Driver of the bus in question drove the vehicle very rashly and negligently, as a result of which the bus collided with the standing truck which was parked on the right side. The deceased sustained injuries and died in S.M.S. Hospital, Jaipur. Wife and children of the deceased filed a claim petition before the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dausa (for short 'the Tribunal'). The learned Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 88,320 as compensation.2. Feeling aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the claimants-appellants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of the award passed by the learned Tribunal.3. I have heard the arguments of both the sides.4. In the motor accident claim cases where there are more than one claimant, common appropriate multiplier should be adopted for all the...
State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Kuldeep Singh Chauhan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)WLC1; 1998(1)WLN28
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The appellants have filed this Special Appeal Under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated, January 21, 1997 of the learned Single Judge of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5752/95. The learned Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants. Before the learned Single Judge, that part of the order dated, January 19, 1995 of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, was under challenge whereby the appellants were directed to review the case of respondent No. 1 herein, for grant of selection scales under Order/Circular dated, 25.1.1992 keeping in view observations and findings made in the order after examining his suitability.2. The controversy relates to interpretation of the Government Order/Circular dated, 25.1.1992. The factual aspect giving rise to the present appeal may be narrated, which is as under: The Respondent No. 1 was initially appointed as Enfo...
Rajasthan State Electricity Board Vs. Judge, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-15-1998
Reported in: (2002)IVLLJ744Raj; 1997(3)WLC401
Bhagwati Prasad, J. 1. By this petition the petitioner State Electricity Board has impugned the award passed by the Labour Court, Udaipur, dated March 6, 1985. By this award, the Tribunal held the enquiry conducted against the respondent workman as valid. However, the Tribunal was of the view that punishment awarded to the workman was disproportionate to the act committed by him and therefore, the Tribunal exercised its powers under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act and altered the punishment to one of stoppage of four increments without cumulative effect.2. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Tribunal has not considered the gravity of the charges against the workman in right perspective. The workman was guilty of insubordination and; also abusing the family members of its officer and in this view of the matter the disciplinary authority was right in awarding dismissal from service.3. The learned counsel for the respondent workman s stated that t...
Santosh and ors. Vs. Ranjit Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-15-1998
Reported in: II(1998)ACC232; 1998ACJ959; 1998WLC(Raj)UC467; 1998(1)WLN26
J.C. Verma, J.1. Because of the unfortunate accident on 21.12.1985 at the place called Rupangarh when truck No. RNB 948 had hit jeep RLA 5524, driver of the jeep Govind Singh died who was aged about 25 years at the time of death. At that time he was getting a monthly income of Rs. 750/- per month. His wife Santosh aged about 23 years, his son aged about 10 months and his mother Durga preferred the claim before the M.A.C.T. The Tribunal had come to the finding that the deceased Govind Singh had died because of rash and negligent driving of truck No. RNB 948 being driven by Ranjit Singh driver, respondent No. 1. The dependency income was assessed at Rs. 500/- per month and applying the multiplier of 35, a compensation of Rs. 2,10,000/- was ultimately assessed and in addition consortium of Rs. 5,000/- was granted to wife and another Rs. 5,000/- to the minor son. The mother was not paid any amount at all. The total compensation assessed by the Tribunal came to be Rs. 2,20,000/- and after d...
Raghuvar S/O Chothu Alias Chothmal Mali R/O Chomu Vs. Board of Revenue ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-15-1998
Reported in: 1998(1)WLN20
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. Defendant petitioner by filing these writ petitions has prayed that orders of the Board of Revenue dated 1.1.1996 (Ann. 5) and dated 7.2.1996 (Ann. 6), the order dated 7.2.1996 (Ann. 11) passed by the Assistant Collector, Chomu (District Jaipur) respondent No. 2, as also subsequent proceedings in the revenue suits Nos. 451/1984 & 452/1984. taken in his absence be quashed & set aside.2. The admitted skeletal facts necessary for the disposal of these writ petitions are that on 3.2.1984, respondent Chhitar filed afore mentioned two suits in Court of Asstt. Collector, Chomu for correction of entries in the record of rights under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act in respect of the disputed agriculture lands against his brothers viz. Raghuvar (petitioner) & Prabhu with the averments that the disputed land was given to him for cultivation by the then Thikana Chomu, that he was in exclusive cultivatory possession thereof and paying the land revenue and that the names of Raghuvar ...
United India Insurance Co. Vs. Shahjad Khan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ54; (1998)IILLJ744Raj; 1998(2)WLC205; 1998(1)WLN16
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.This appeal has been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen s Compensation Act, 1923 against the order dated November 23, 1993 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Sirohi in W.C. Case No. 22/1992. By the aforesaid order, the Commissioner made an award of Rs. 87,980/- and further awarded penalty @ 15% and interest on the principal amount.2. The facts of the case may be briefly summarised as below:Respondent Shahjad Khan, -- Yusuf and Latif filed a claim against the petitioner United India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office, Jodhpur and Menrab Khan (Respondent No. 5). Respondents No. 1 to 4 prayed that a compensation of Rs. 87,980/- be awarded alongwith 15% penalty and 18% interest on the amount of compensation. According to the averments made in their application dated April 23, 1991, Nasir Khan s/o Shahjad Khan was in the employment of Mehrab Khan (Respondent No. 5) as a driver. He used ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »