Rajasthan Court February 1998 Judgments
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Girdhari Lal and Etc.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Raj240; 1998(3)WLC76; 1998(1)WLN216
ORDER Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. Common question that cropped up for consideration in all the three revisions, is whether the District Judge designated by the Chief Justice, as 'authority' to deal with the request for taking necessary measures under subsection (6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of Section 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short CPC), for making its order revisable under Section 115. CPC? 2. This question arises in (he following circumstances - (i) In connection with the contract works certain dispute arose between the Union of India and the contractor non-petitioners. Thereafter Claims were referred to the Arbitrator. While the proceedings were in progress before the Arbitrator, the Contractor non-petitioners submitted applications under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the New Act) before the District Judge. Jodhpur praying therein that the scope of ...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Poojara Vs. Mohan Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Raj213; 1998(1)WLN212
ORDERJ.C. Verma, J. 1. In a suit for specific performance between the parties wherein interim injunction was also sought restraining the defendant respondent for alienating the property, the interim injunction had been granted by the trial court, Civil Misc. Appeal No. 150/95 was filed by the defendant before this Court which was decided on 1-5-1997 by the Hon'ble Justice Kejriwal (now retired). The appellate Court after hearing the parties had modified the order of interim injunction to the effect that the plaintiff was not entitled to receive rent from the respondents 2 to 6 pending the suit and the defendant tenants were directed to make the payment of the rent to the defendant appellant Mohanlal. It was further ordered that in case the plaintiff appellant wantedto sell the disputed property, he had to mention in the sale-deed itself that a civil suit is pending in the Court of Additional District Judge No. 3, Jaipur city, for specific performance of the disputed property so that th...
Tag this Judgment!Laxman Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Raj306; 1998(3)WLC672
ORDERGyan Sudha Mishra, J.1. The petitioner Laxman Meena who had been elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Chhoti Udai in the District Sawai Madhopur has challenged the initiation of a proceeding by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sawai Madhopur for passing No Confidence Motion against the petitioner for which a notice was issued on 24-9-97 convening a meeting for the said purpose which was to be held on 14-10-97. 2. The grounds of challenge to the said proceeding are based on Section 37 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 read with Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Raj Rules. 1996 and the principal contention in this regard is that the meeting for the said purpose should not be allowed to be conducted since the very initiation of the proceeding has been done violating the mandatory procedure enumerated in the aforesaid provisions of the Act. 3. The controversy therefore, which crops up for consideration in the case at hand is, whether a No Confidence Motion against ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Wafatan Vs. Jamil Ahmed
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: I(1999)DMC327
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. 'Whether wife is entitled to claim maintenance for the minor children from the husband even though husband is ready and willing to keep the child and maintain himself, specially in cases of Mohammedans where the mother is entitled to the custody of the child even after divorce upto a particular age ?'2. The above question stands referred to this Bench for its opinion under the following circumstances:3. On November 20, 1978 Smt. Wafatan, the petitioner, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C.) in the Court of the Addl. Munsiff-cum-Judicial Magistrate No. 2 (South) claiming maintenance for herself and her two children, a son then aged two years and a daughter aged six months, from her husband Jamil Ahmed, the non-petitioner. The learned Magistrate, however, dismissed the same on 13.4.1981 holding that the non-petitioner had neither neglected nor refused to maintain the petitioner and her children, instead, ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. S.D. Khetani Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2493
ORDERV.G. Palshikar, J.1. Both these revision petitions are directed against the order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur in 24-2-94, allowing the revision application of the complainant by which the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, directed framing of charges against the applicant in each of these revisions.2. Facts giving rise to these petitions, stated briefly are that a First Information Report was lodged before the Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur, by which respondent No. 2, who alleged that he got himself admitted to the Jodhpur Hospital and Research Centre, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, for treatment of his ailment of bleeding piles. During the course of his treatment he disclosed that he is a patient of diabetes and, should, accordingly be treated. On 21-4-92, he developed some pain in his back and was, therefore, referred to Dr. Narender Singh Yadav, applicant in Revision Petition No. 111 /94, as he was working in the orthopacdic Department of the Hosp...
Tag this Judgment!Rajan Bhanot and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Etc.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1928
ORDERA.S. Godara, J.1. Since all these petitions arise out of F.I.R. No. 506/97 registered at and pending investigation with the Police Station, Chopasani Housing Board, Jodhpur and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. For disposal of these petitions briefly stated the facts of the case arc that Abdul Shakoor first informant who lodged written report at the said Police Station on 5-12-97 at 4.15 p.m. alleged that his daughter Nisha (since deceased) aged 21 -22 years was in love with Subhash son of the accused-petitioner Krishna Kumar, and in the mid of 1997, Subhash and Smt. Nisha celebrated their marriage before Arya Samaj , Ajmer and, subsequently, since Smt, Nisha, on her examination by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jodhpur, expressed her willingness to live with her husband Subhash and so the parties of Smt. Nisha were reconciled to inter religious marriage of Smt. Nisha with Subhash and hence Smt. Nisha started living with her husband Subhash...
Tag this Judgment!Bal Kishan Vs. District and Sessions Judge and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)WLC756; 1998(1)WLN190
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant petition has been filed challenging the order dated 6.6.1990 contained in Annexure. 4 to this writ petition, by which the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Upper Division Clerk has been turned down.2. The petitioner claimed that he had been appointed as Lower Division Clerk vide order dated 11.9.1969 in the District & Sessions Judgeship, Pali and in pursuance to the said appointment letter, he had been confirmed as Lower Division Clerk with effect from 1.10.1982. The petitioner's name was shown at Serial No. 29 and the respondent No. 2 was shown at Serial No. 31 as is evident from the Seniority List contained as Annexure. 1 to the petition. The Rajasthan Subordinate Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1986') governs the service conditions of the employees like the petitioner and for the purpose of promotion, the Rule 14 of the Rules, 1986 provides the criteria of 'seniority cum merit'. Vi...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Bhawan Vs. Instrumentation Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1998
Reported in: 1998WLC(Raj)UC514; 1998(1)WLN502
D.C. Dalela, J.1. After completion of the period of probation, the petitioner was brought on regular cadre of the respondent-company as Additional Manager with effect from 1.10.1979 vide order dated 8.10.1979. In the seniority list of the Additional Managers issued by the management of the respondent No. 1, the petitioner has been shown at S.No. 13. The petitioner has rendered 14 years of continuous service on 1.10.1983 + one year's of Engineering Graduate Apprentice Training. On 3.10.1983, an order came to be issued by which the petitioner was transferred from Production Division, Kota unit to Erection and Commissioning (Commercial Unit). According to the petitioner before transfer order could be served on him, he proceeded on leave with effect from 4.10.1983 to 6.10.1983. He reported back on 7.10.1983. He was relieved from his unit to join Commission. The petitioner again sought leave for 7th and 8th October 1983. and further extension of leave from 9th October to 13th October, with ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Indra Sharma and ors. Vs. Chairman, Rseb, Jaipur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ689; AIR1998Raj140; 1998(2)WLC414; 1998(1)WLN491
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J. 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against dismissal of claim petition dated 27-8-92 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Banswara. 2. The brief facts leading up to filing of the appeal which are relevant for its just decision are that in Paragraphs 11 and 13 of the claim petition it is specifically pleaded that on 14-9-85 at about 6.30 p.m. deceased Dwarka Prasad Sharma along with other persons after performing their official work at Banswara were returning back to Gatol in a department's Jeep bearing registration No.RJB 2004. It is further pleaded that the said Jeep was being driven by respondent No. 2 Navin Chandra Suthar. When the said Jeep reached near 'Mahi Rest House' due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2 it met with an accident resulting in severe injuries to the persons sitting in it, including Dwarka Prasad who was immediately taken for treatment to M. G. Hospital, Banswara where he s...
Tag this Judgment!Nathu Lal and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Raj245
ORDERG.L. Gupta, J. 1. In (he above mentioned seven writ petitions the validity of the notification issued under Section 4 dated 16-5-1988 and the declaration under Section 6. D/- 15-3-1989 has been called in question.2. The facts common to the petitions are that the respondents issued notification, dated 16-5-1988 which was published in Govt. Gazette on 30-6-1988 to acquire the various lands situate in village Devali Fatehpura for Fatehpur Extension Scheme. Respondent Urban Improvement Trust was the beneficiary. The notifications have been assailed on various grounds in the writ petition but Mr. Bhandari confined his arguments to four grounds. It is, therefore, not necessary to mention all the facts. The grounds pressed by Mr. Bhandari are (i) The acquisition proceedings could be undertaken only under Section 52 of the Urban Improvement Trust Act and as the Presidential assent has not been obtained for the amendment in Section 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Trust Act, the whole...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »