Rajasthan Court April 2002 Judgments
Chandan Kaur (Smt.) Vs. Wali Mohammed and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1553; 2002(5)WLC67; 2002(5)WLN426
Panwar, J.1. Both these appeals are directed against the judgment and award dt. 27.1.94 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balotra (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,82,000/-in favour or appellant-claimant in M.A.C. Case No. 50/91 for the death of her husband Poonam Chand including interest and Rs. 45,000/- in favour of the appellant-claimant for the death of her son aged about 12 years in M.A.C. Case No, 52/91 including interest.2. Aggrieved and dis-satisfied by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant-claimants (for short 'the claimants') have preferred the aforesaid two separate appeals seeking enhancement of compensation.3. Brief facts stated to the extent they are relevant and necessary for the decision of these two appeals are that on 5.5.1991 at about 1.30 P.M., deceased Poonam Chand, his son Niraj alias Pintu and Om Prakash were proceeding on a scooter from Kitnod to Balotra. After co...
Tag this Judgment!Asstt. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes (Special Circle) Vs. Sri Pipes ( ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj207; 2002(3)WLN622; 2002(3)WLN622
Chauhan, J. 1. The instant revision has been filed against the order of the Division Bench of the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, dated 24.7.2001, by which it has held that the inspection charges paid by the assessee but subsequently reimbursed by the purchaser, shall not form part of the sale price.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the respondent-assessee had entered into an agreement with the public Health & Engineering Department, Rajasthan, for the sale of A.C. Cement Pressure Pipes and inspection charges had to be paid by the purchaser subsequently. The Assessing Authority, when made the assessment for the years 1987-88, 1990-91 and 1991-92, held that the said inspection charges formed part of the turn over being ah integral part of the sale price and the tax was imposed. Subsequently, appeals were filed, which had been accepted by the Appellate Authority vide judgment and order dated July 15/16, 1998, against which further appeals were preferred before ...
Tag this Judgment!Radhey Shyam and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2227
Bansal, J.1. As many as 12 accused were put on trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Kota, in Sessions Case No. 72/94. The learned trial Judge acquitted accused Ram Gopal, Mangilal, Mukutbihari, Mahendra, Badrilal, Girraj Prasad, Chhitarlal and Chandalal. Accused Surendra absconded during trial. Accused Radhey Shyam, Om Prakash and Babulal were convicted and sentenced by the learned Judge vide its judgment dated Judge 12, 1997 as under:-1.Radhey Shyamu/S 147 IPCSix Months R.I. with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to furtherundergo two months S.I.u/S 148 IPCOne year R.I. with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to furtherundergo three months S.I.u/S 302 IPCLife Imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default tofurther undergo two years S.I.2.Om Prakash & Babuialu/S 147 IPCSix months R.I. with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to furtherundergo two months S.I.u/S 148 IPCOne year R.I. with a fine of Rs, 500A, in default to furtherundergo three months S.I.u/S 302/149 IPCL...
Tag this Judgment!United Phospherus Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1681; 2002(5)WLN59
Joshi, J. 1. The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the manufacturing company M/s. United Phospherus Limited and its Directors against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gharsana in criminal original No. 478/94 dated 19th October, 94 taking cognizance against the petitioners under Section 29 of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (in short, 'the Act') hereinafter) and the present petitioners alongwith other accused were summoned. 2. Heard Mr. M.K. Garg, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.D. Kalla, learned Public Prosecutor for the State. 3. As per averments and the complaint filed before the trial Court, Shri Mahesh Roop Rai, Insecticide Inspector on 28.8.93, took a sample of Fenvelrate 20% E.C. from the shop of M/s. Shiv Fertilisers, Gharsana District Sri Ganganagar. It was sent to Insecticide Analyst, Durgapura, Jaipur, who in his report dated 21st October, 93 reported that the sample was mis-branded. The complaint was filed against ...
Tag this Judgment!Satya Pal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN582
O.P. Bishnoi, J.1. This revision has been filed by the accused Satyapal against an order dated 5.8.1998 passed by the learned Additional-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suratgarh.2. The complainant Devilal, since deceased, on 20.11.1991 lodged an F.I.R. at Police Station, Suratgarh.3. According to the F.I.R. on 61991 the accused persons went to Smt. Tulchhi in Village Shopura. Smt. Tulchhi was old and, ailing. The accused persons Raibahadur, Satyapal, Vinod Kumar, Kamal Chand and Vishvanath conspired and thumb marks of Tulchhi were obtained on a Will, while Tulchhi was unconscious. A case Under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 was registered at Police Station, Suratgarh. During investigation it came out that the parties were at logger-heads in respect of certain agricultural lands left behind by Smt, Tulchhi, who died on 8.11.1991. Prior to the lodging of the said F.I.R. litigation in respect of the disputed property was pending in the revenue courts where the Will in dispute was produced by ...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Kailash and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC321
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar dated 7.4.2000 in Claim Case No. 84/1997.2. Under this award the learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 40,000/- as compensation for the injuries caused to the claimants in the motor accident by the vehicle which is insured with the appellant.3. This appeal is presented in the Court on 19.7.2000. Office on scrutiny of the matter on 28.7.2000 pointed out as many as 3 defects therein which are as under:1. Receipt in compliance of Section 173 of M.V. Act, 1988 not filed.2. Case number not mentioned in the subject-matter.3. Page number 3 of the judgment is underlined.4. More than one year and six months have already been passed, the officers of the United India Insurance Company have not bothered, cared or concerned to remove the office objections. The appellant Company had its own legal call, highly paid officers are there. It is difficult to believe what to say to accept that these officers w...
Tag this Judgment!Khushi Ram Kiln Company and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC671; 2002(3)WLN578
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The above mentioned five writ petitions are being decided by this common order as in all of them subject matter in dispute is the same.S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2183/19882. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the respondents with the prayer that the order dated 4.6.1988 (Annex. 3 to the writ petition) passed by the Collector, Sri Ganganagar by which conversion charges at the rate of Rs. 400/- per bigha per annum were demanded from the petitioner and further, demand notice dated 30.6.1988 (Annex. 4 to' the writ petition) issued by the Tehsildar (Revenue), Sri Ganganagar in pursuance of the order dated 4.6.1988 (Annex. 3) be quashed.3. It arises in the following circumstances:The petitioner had a Khatedari land 6 biswas in Killa No. 4, 5 biswas in Killa Nos. 6, 5 biswas in Killa No. 25 and Killa Nos. 7, 14, 15, 16, 17, 22 measuring 6 bighas and 16 biswas in Square No. 2 of Chak 15-Z, Tehsil S...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kailash and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)WLN463
S.K. Kesote, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar dated 7.4.2000 in Claim Case No. 84/97.2. Under this award the learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 40,000/- as compensation for the injuries caused to the claimants in the motor accident by the vehicle which is insured with the appellant.3. This appeal is presented in the Court on 19.7.2000. Office on scrutiny of the matter on 28.7.2000 pointed out as many as 3 defects therein which are as under:1. Receipt in compliance of Section 173 of M.V. Act, 1988 not filed.2. Case number not mentioned in the subject matter.3. Page number 3 of the judgment is underlined.4. More than one year and six months have already been passed, the officers of the United India Insurance Company have not bothered, cared or concerned to remove the office objections. The appellant company had its own legal cell, highly paid officers are there. It is difficult to believe what to say to accept that these officers woul...
Tag this Judgment!The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Kamlesh Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN607
H.R. Panwar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the interim award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat Under Section 140 of the M.V. Act on the principle of 'no fault liability'. The parties agree that on the date of accident intervening night of 29-30th March, 1994, the compensation payable on the principle of 'no fault liability' Under Section 140 of the M.V. Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') before its amendment, was Rs. 25,000/-. Tribunal has awarded Rs. 50,000/-. Amendment came into force enhancing the amount to be paid on the principle of 'no fault liability' from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 50,000/- w.e.f. 14.11.1994 and amendment is not restrospectively in operation.2. This Court in National Insurance Company v. Hira, RLW 1999 (1) Raj. 368 has held that the amendment to Section 140(2) of the Act, which came into force w.e.f. 14.11.1994 cannot be given retrospective effect. The amendment to Section 140(2) of the Act is not procedural law but it is substantive law which af...
Tag this Judgment!Barkat HussaIn Vs. Rameshwar Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-14-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj480
Panwar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dt. 31.8.1995 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 56,800/- as compensation in favour of the appellant and against the respondents.2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that on 6.7.1992, the appellant was travelling in bus No. RRM 3419 at 8.15 pm. The said bus collided with another bus No. RSM 9071. Due to this accident, the appellant sustained injuries on his person. He filed a claim petition before the Tribunal against the drivers, owners and the insurer of both the buses involved in the accident. The Tribunal reached to the conclusion that the said accident was due to rash and negligent driving of both the buses by their respective drivers and accordingly, passed an award as noticed above in favour of the appellant and against the respondents. Dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awar...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »