Rajasthan Court December 2001 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.
Laxmi Udyog Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002(142)ELT27(Raj); 2002(2)WLC371; 2003(1)WLN246
ORDER1. The petitioner has moved this application under Section 35(G)(3) because his application of 31(G)(1) for referring the following question, stated to be a question of law to this court for its opinion has been rejected by the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (CEGAT).'Whether the parts of Power Driven Pumps falling under Heading No. 84.13 were entitled to the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 155/86, Dt. 1-3-86 read with Note 2(a) of Section XVI of Chapter 84 of CET-1986-87.'2. The Tribunal vide its order dated 18-8-2000 has rejected the application under Section 35(G)(1) by the following order :-'In view of the wordings of Section 35G it is clear that no reference lies in the matter involving either of valuation or of rale of duty. Since the matter dealt with the issue with reference to the classification vis. a vis. rate of duty no reference lies. Precisely, this was the consistent view of the Tribunal in view of the wordings of Section 35G. A...
Chandra Prakash Vs. Mangal Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: I(2002)ACC286; 2002ACJ286; 2002WLC(Raj)UC125
J.C. Verma, J.1. This misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant for enhancement of compensation against the order dated 7.8.98 passed by Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, in M.A.C.T. Case No. 657 of 1994 whereby the compensation of Rs. 3,10,000 has been awarded.2. The facts of the case are that the claim application was filed by the claimant, who was only 14 years old when he was hit by the speeding car No. RNI 2400 on 7.9.1994. He filed claim application claiming an amount of Rs. 8,42,000. As many as four issues were framed. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,10,000 in toto.3. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the appellant that due to the injury sustained by the claimant, his left leg has been amputated at the place of knee in SMS Hospital, Jaipur. He sustained 65 per cent permanent disability. He used to go to school by bicycle but now he is to incur additional amount on vehicle for going to school. His marriage prospects are also definitely affected. At the time o...
Kamla and ors. Vs. Sukhdev Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC35; 2003ACJ246
J.C. Verma, J.1. This misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant for the enhancement of compensation against the order dated 4.3.1997 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Beawar, District Ajmer in M.A.C.T. Case No. 73 of 1994 whereby compensation of Rs. 2,50,400 has been awarded,2. Facts of the case are that the claim application was filed by the claimants, who are widow and children of deceased Faras Ram who died in the accident which had taken place on 27.3.1994 between the jeep No. RJ 01-971 and the truck No. PAT 7513. The victim was travelling in the jeep. After framing the required issues the Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs. 2,50,400.3. It is the submission of learned Counsel for appellants that the wife has stated that her husband was earning Rs. 3,000 per month and whole amount of Rs. 3,000 were being given for maintenance of the house. However, the Tribunal has assessed the monthly income to be Rs. 1,500, out of which the dependency has been assessed as ...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mithlesh Gupta and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: I(2002)ACC435; II(2002)ACC48; 2002ACJ435; 2002WLC(Raj)UC137
J.C. Verma, J.1. These two connected misc. appeals arise out of the same award regarding the same accident. The Misc. Appeal No. 149 of 1994 has been filed by the insurance company whereas Misc. Appeal No. 121 of 1994 has been filed by the claimants under the same award.2. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur had awarded a total amount of Rs. 9,24,000 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum in Case No. 1 of 1993 vide its order dated 23.11.1993 as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased Nawal Kishore. The claimants were the widow, children and mother, etc., of the deceased.3. The accident occurred on 3.12.1992, while going on scooter the deceased was hit from behind by truck No. RRD 6056. The Tribunal as a matter of fact awarded an amount of Rs. 11,40,000 as compensation but had deducted an amount of Rs. 2,31,000 from the said compensation, i.e., 20 per cent of the compensation on the ground that lump sum was being paid to the claimants and remaining amount of Rs. ...
Devendra JaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1655; 2002(1)WLC540
Sharma, J.1. Instant writ petitions have been filed challenging the vires of Sections 3, 4,5 6 and 9 of the Rajasthan Control of Goondas Act 1975 (for short the Act). Ancillary reliefs seeking quashing of the orders of the courts below have also been sought.2. The Additional District Magistrate Kota under Section 3 of the Act ordered for externment for a period of six months of the petitioners Devendra Jain from Kota to Sawai Madhopur and Satya Narain @ Sattu from Kota to Bundi.3. We have heard the rival submissions and scanned are relevant statutory provisions.4. The contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners are as under.(i) In view of Sub-section (4) of Section 3 of Cr.P.C. the Legislature is not having any such power to enact the Act which grant power to the Executive Magistrate to award punishment for the reason that by the amendment of the Cr.P.C. 1973 the power of the Executive Magistrate and Judicial Magistrate were bifurcated and it was also stipulated in explicit terms th...
Abhay and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLN27
Rathore, J. 1. The present misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 313/2001 registered at Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar for offence under Section 323, 341, 336 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989.2. The main content on the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the definition of Section 3(1)(x) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, offence under Section 3(1)(x) cannot be said to be committed by the accused-petitioners and if the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the aforesaid Act is not made out against the petitioners, the rest of the offences under Section 323, 341 and 336 IPC are bailable offences. In support of his contention learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment (Sheosahai Sharma v. State of Rajasthan) (1), and requested that the aforesaid FIR should be quashed and set aside on this count alone.3. Heard learn...
Suja Devi and ors. Vs. Hari Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ140
J.C. Verma, J.1. This is an appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, dated 14.9.1993 in Case No. 1352 of 1992 wherein an amount of Rs. 84,000 was awarded along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum to the claimants. The claimants are the widow, two daughters, two sons and the parents of the deceased Jagdish Chandra Jat who died in an accident on 13.4.1990 when he was hit by a truck bearing registration No. RSB 5178. The Tribunal had found that the accident had been caused because of negligent driving of the said truck driver. However, while assessing the amount of compensation, the Tribunal while determining the age to be 35 years of the deceased had assessed the income as Rs. 500 per month and the dependency was fixed as Rs. 350 per month. Apart from the above, the Tribunal had also granted Rs. 15,000 towards loss of consortium to the widow and Rs. 10,000 to other claimants for loss of love and affection. The...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunita Gupta and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ249
J.C. Verma, J.1. This appeal has been filed by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. against the quantum of compensation amount, i.e., Rs. 29,54,000 awarded by the M.A.C.T., Jaipur City, Jaipur, vide its award dated 6.11.2000 in favour of the claimants who were the legal heirs of the deceased Ashok Kumar Gupta, who had died in an accident. The deceased was 36 years of age arid working as Manager in the J.K. Cement. His salary slip was placed on record, i.e., Exh. 9 stating therein that he was drawing Rs. 23,969 per month as salary and the multiplier of 14 was applied by the learned Tribunal.2. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal in this appeal as no infirmity has been committed by the Tribunal in awarding amount of compensation for the age of 36 years and it cannot be said that the multiplier was on higher side. The salary slip had been taken on record and the dependency has rightly been assessed by the Tribunal.3. I...
Sunita and ors. Vs. Sky Wing Courier Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ467
J.C. Verma, J.1. The appellants are the claimants in this appeal and claiming compensation because of death of deceased Ashok Kumar. The Tribunal had awarded the amount of compensation, however, in the award dated 6.11.2000, the Tribunal has somehow omitted to mention about the interest to be paid on the amount of compensation. The Tribunal had failed to mention whether the claimants were entitled to interest or not.2. Learned counsel for the appellants states that in case, the interest was not to be awarded by the Tribunal, in that situation, the Tribunal ought to have rejected the payment of interest by a specific order. Section 171 says that the Tribunal may award interest from the date of filing of the application.3. In my opinion, either the Tribunal ought to have rejected the payment of interest or should have ordered to pay the interest. Tribunal had failed to comply with the provisions of the aforesaid section.4. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the op...
Samiullaha Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ839; 2002(2)WLC69; 2002(4)WLN456
Misra, J.1. The question that falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether an accused like the petitioner herein who has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter shortly referred to as the N.D.P.S. Act of 1985) can at all avail the privilege of 'parole' under the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (for short 'Rajasthan Prisoners Rules, 1958) for any reason whatsoever.2. A slight enumeration of the circumstances would indicate that the petitioner herein-Samiullaha has been convicted and sentenced for an offence under Section 8/21 of the N.D.P.s. Act, 1985 vide judgment and order dated 25.9.2000 passed by the Special Judge, N.D.P.S., Jaipur against which the petitioner has preferred as appeal before this High Court which is pending. During pendency of the appeal and while undergoing the sentence, the petitioner filed an application before the Jail authorities for emergency parole unde...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »