Rajasthan Court April 2003 Judgments
Jai Kumar Sharma and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2489
Parihar, J.1. Petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.1.2003 issued by respondent No. 2 directing the petitioner to remove encroachment from the road, specifying the same in the notice. It has been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that in spite of temporary injunction been granted by trial court, the notice has been issued by the respondent No. 2.2. After having considered entire facts and circumstances of the present case, since the petitioner has already approached and availed a remedy of filing a suit before the trial Court and some interim orders have also been passed, no interference is called for by this Court under its writ jurisdiction in the present matter. Even otherwise the Courts should not be a party encourage encroachment on the public land, more specifically the roads and lanes. By passing interim orders in such matters would only lower down the image of the Courts. Even any efforts are made by public authorities to regularise such unauthorised constructions...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Kesu Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2003
Reported in: (2004)ILLJ767Raj
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, we find that no cause much less sufficient cause has been shown by the appellant for not filing the appeal within limitation. We have also heard the learned counsel for the appellant on merit and found that there is no merit in this appeal.2. The wife of respondent during the course of employment with the appellant received injury as a result of falling of a stone on her head under which she was crushed and thereafter, she died. The compensation claim under Workmen's Compensation Act was filed by her husband the respondent. The Workmen's Compensation Commissioner determined the amount of compensation payable to husband and two children of deceased, on admitted facts that Smt. Manaki was employed @ Rs. 32/- per day and was so employed at the time of accident.3. The Commissioner also found that it has come on record that the deceased had one son Varda and d...
Tag this Judgment!Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Mangal Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2003
Reported in: III(2003)ACC232
N.N. Mathur, J.1. Since instant special appeal arises out of a very old claim of the year 1987, we propose to dispose it, at the admission stage itself.2. Adumbrated in brief the facts are that the claimant Mangal Singh was travelling in the bus belonging to the appellant Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') from Chittorgarh to Fatehnagar. He set near the window seat. On the way a truck coming from the opposite side passed too closely by the side of the bus causing injury to the right hand of the claimant. The claimant was operated upon and his right upper arm, just below the shoulder joint was amputated resulting in 80% permanent disability. At the relevant time the claimant was earning Rs. 1,500/- per month, as an employee of a private Company namely M/s. Rajfed Oil Mill, Fatehnagar. He claimed compensation in the sum of Rs. 1,69,500/-. The claim was resisted by the appellant Corporation. In the opinion of the Tribunal, cla...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Shakuntala Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Raj)520; [2004]270ITR590(Raj)
1. On an application under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court : 'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 85,000 imposed by the IAC under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee late Dr. L.M. Simlot was a medical practitioner. The relevant assessment year is 1966-67. In that year, he was also an employee of the Government of Rajasthan. In the returns, he has shown income from salary as well as from private practice. 3. The assessee did not maintain any regular books of accounts in respect of his private practice. The assessee filed returns and those returns were revised thrice and different figures of income has been shown in the returns. The ITO had in his possession information that the assessee had issued certificates to the employees of postal department and gross receipts were Rs. 1,09,489. This fact was brought to the...
Tag this Judgment!Dhula and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ423; RLW2003(4)Raj2186; 2003(3)WLC276
Mathur, J. 1. In this group of petitions, petitioners are life convicts on the charge of murder and they are, undergoing imprisonment for life.2. The common grievance of the petitioners is that inspite of the fact that their case have riped for premature release as they have undergone a sentence of more than 14 years, still their cases have not been considered by the Government under the provisions of Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules 1958'). In another group of petitions the grievance voiced is that their case for premature release under the Rules of 1958 has been refused by the Government on unsustainable grounds. It is submitted that concern State authorities have failed to discharge their statutory duty to implement the Enlightened Policy of premature release of a convict for life imprisonment.3. With a view to deal with the grievance of the applicants it would be convenient to refer some of the provisions which have dire...
Tag this Judgment!Mangtu Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4733; RLW2004(1)Raj226; 2004(1)WLC256
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner against the judgment dated 9.9.92 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar in Criminal Appeal No. 31/90 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal of the accused petitioner and upheld the judgment and order dtd. 13.11.90 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nohar in Criminal Case No. 99/88 whereby the learned Magistrate convicted the accused petitioner for offence under Section 197 I.P.C. and sentenced him to 1 year's R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further undergo 2 months' S.I.2. The facts giving rise to this revision petition are as under:i) That Mst, Chhoti widow of late Shri Khiraj (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) filed a complaint before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Nohar on 28.9.85 against the accused petitioner for offence under Section 197 I.P.C. inter alia stating that there was an agricultural lan...
Tag this Judgment!Shakuntla Devi (Smt.) Vs. Shiv Charan Sankhla
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj745
Goyal, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 17.1.2003 whereby learned A.C.J.M. No. 2, Alwar dismissed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for interim maintenance.2. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioner-wife filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against her husband-respondent with the averments that she was married to Shiv Charan in the year 1954 and one daughter was borne out of this wedlock. Her husband Shiv Charan retired from Government Service in the year 1995 and at that time she came to know that he has got relations with one Kamlesh and or raising objection by her, she was expelled by her husband from his house in June, 1996. Her husband having sufficient means has neglected to maintain her and she is unable to maintain herself. Vide another application, she made a prayer for interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month. A number of affidavits and some other documents were filed in support of thi...
Tag this Judgment!Saroj Sharma and ors. Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1661
Anil Dev Singh, C.J.1. Late Shri Shyam Swaroop Sharma was posted as A.D.J., Dholpur in the year 1999. On 25.11.1999 he was admitted in the General Hospital, Dholpur, where he was diagnosed for Renal disease. He remained in the Dholpur General Hospital for a period of more than one month. Ultimately, he was referred to SMS Hospital, Jaipur by the General Hospital, Dholpur. On 7.1.2000, a committee consisting of three Doctors was constituted to examine the deceased. The committee found the deceased suffering from N.I.D.D.M. Type II, Diabetic Retinopathy, Hypertension, Diabetic Nephropathy, End stage Renal disease. It was also opined by the committee that the Chronic Renal Failure was at an advanced stage. They also opined that Shri Sharma required to undergo an operation for Kidney Transplant. In January, 2000, he was released from SMS Hospital in order to enable him to be treated at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). After being released from SMS Hospital, the deceased is ...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Smt. Shakuntala Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-2003
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN192(Raj)
On an application under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 85,000 imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 196l?'2. The assessee late Dr. L.M. Simlot was a medical practitioner. The relevant assessment year is 1966-67. In that year, he was also an employee of the Government of Rajasthan. In the returns, he has shown income from salary as well as from private practice.3. The assessee did not maintain any regular books of accounts in respect of his private practice. The assessee filed returns and those returns were revised thrice and different figures of income has been shown in the returns. The Income Tax Officer had in his possession information that the assessee had issued certificates to the employees of postal department and gross rec...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Rajneesh Vs. Savita and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Raj280; II(2003)DMC690; RLW2003(4)Raj2512; 2003(3)WLC526
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner is aggrieved against the order dated 10th April, 2003 by which the petitioner's application dated 20th March, 2003 was dismissed by the trial Court.3. Brief facts of the case are that the non-petitioner who is wife of the petitioner filed one divorce petition against the petitioner in the trial Court. The grounds for seeking relief of divorce are cruelty and desertion. The petitioner submitted reply to the divorce petition and also filed counter-claim and sought relief of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion, therefore, there are allegations and counter-claim of cruelty and desertion by each party against other. The petitioner submitted an application under Section 151, CPC and requested that in case, non-petitioner-applicant withdraws the allegations of cruelty and desertion, then the decree may be passed for which the petitioner will have no objection. It is also stated that the petitioner i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »