Rajasthan Court April 2003 Judgments
Smt. Krishna Kunwar and ors. Vs. Sukh Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)WLN616
H.R. Panwar, J.1. These two appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 23.5.1997 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Banswara (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- in favour of the appellant-claimants in each case, viz., in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 473/97 (MACT Cases No. 209/1995) and S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 474/1997 (MACT Cases No 213/1994) and against the respondents. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation assessed and awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant-claimants (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimants') have filed these two appeals seeking enhancement of compensation.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused-the judgment and award impugned. I have also gone through the record of the Tribunal.3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the Tribunal fell in error in awarding low compensation. It was further...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Agro Engineers
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-2003
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Raj)427; [2004]266ITR637(Raj)
1. The appeal has been admitted on 9th April, 2001, in terms of the following question :'Whether Tribunal was justified in not confirming the order of CIT(A) who had set aside the order of assessment with the direction to give fresh opportunity to the assessee ?'2. The relevant assessment year is 1990-91. The assessee has filed the return of income declaring income at Rs. 98,108. Thereafter notice under Section 143(2) of the IT Act was issued more than 10 times, but assessee did not respond to the notice. Thereafter the AO has made the assessment order under Section 144 of the IT Act, 1961, and estimated the income of the assessee at Rs. 3,52,947 and apportioned it amongst the partners as referred in the assessment order.3. That assessment has been challenged before the CIT(A). CIT(A) has noticed that before framing the assessment under Section 144 of the Act, proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 144 has not been complied with, Therefore, he set aside the order of the AO and restored ...
Tag this Judgment!Parmesh Pachar Vs. Convener, Central Undergradutate Admission Board an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2284; 2003(3)WLC137
Anil Dev Singh, C.J. 1. By this writ petition the petitioner seeks following reliefs :- ' (i) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the petitioner fully eligible to get admission in M.B.B.S./BDS course in view of his merit standing; (ii) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent not to interfere in any manner whatsoever with the admission that has been granted to the petitioner in M.B.B.S. Course at Mahatma Gandhi National Institute of Medical Sciences, Jaipur; (iii) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent that a candidate suffering from colour blindness cannot be held disqualified for admission to MBBS/BDS course; (iv) any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be passed in favour of humble petitioner including award of cost of this writ petition.' 2. The petitioner who belongs to OBC category, ap...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Bana Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1968; RLW2003(4)Raj2663; 2003(3)WLC357
Misra, J.1. An interim award has been passed in favour of the respondents-claimants on account of death of one Thawar Singh who died in a road accident caused by the vehicle which was insured with the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. The petitioner has challenged this interim award on the ground that the claim petition was filed by the deceased-Thawar Singh on account of injury which was suffered by him, but if he has died after a lapse of few months, it cannot be inferred that the death took place on account of the accident, which he had met with the vehicle.2. It is obvious from these facts that evidence will be required in the matter as to what was the exact cause of death of deceased Thawar Singh and if there is prima facie material which was before the Tribunal that although initially he had suffered grievous injury and subsequently died on account of the complications created by the injury, it is difficult to ignore the obvious conclusion that he died as a consequence of the injur...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj783; 2003(4)WLC364
Sharma, J.1. The eight appellants were placed on trial for dacoity and murder before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Khetri (Jhunjhunu) who convicted and sentenced all of them vide judgment dated August II, 2000 as under-U/s. 148 IPC to undergo three years R.I. and fine of Rs. U/s. 342 IPC 1000/- and in default of payment of fine tofurther sentence of 3 months S.I.U/s. 458 IPC to undergo ten years RI-and fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine tofurther suffer two years SI.U/s. 396 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life, and fine of Rs. 5000 in default to further suffer twoyears S.I.U/s. 397 IPC to suffer seven years RI.U/s. 398 IPC to suffer seven years RI.All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The occurrence of dacoity and murder which was the subject matter of the charge against the appellants, is said to have taken place on November 6,1996 around 8.45 p.m. at the house of Satyaveer Mehrda (PW. 2) who submitted written report to the Police Station Khet...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Agro Engineers
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-2003
Reported in: [2003]130TAXMAN830(Raj)
ORDERThe appeal has been admitted on 9-4-2001 in terms of the following question :'Whether ITAT was justified in not confirming the order of Commissioner (Appeals) who had set aside the order of assessment with the direction to give fresh opportunity to the assessee ?'2. The relevant assessment year is 1990-91. The assessee has filed the return of income declaring income at Rs. 98,108. Thereafter notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued more than 10 times, but assessee did not respond to the notice. Thereafter the assessing officer has made the assessment order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and estimated the income of the assessee at Rs. 3,52,947 and apportioned it amongst the partners as referred in the assessment order.3. That assessment has been challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) has noticed that before framing the assessment under section 144 of the Act, proviso to sub-section (1) of section 144 has not been comp...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash Leela Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2183; 2003(3)WLC208
Tatia, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Learned counsel for the respondents has raised preliminary objection that the impugned order Ex.P.10 dated 26.2.2003 by which petitioner's transfer order dated 20.2.2003 was cancelled can be challenged by filing appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal and, therefore, when the statutory alternate remedy is available then the writ petition of the petitioner is not maintainable and here in this case, there exists no reason for exercising discretion to entertain the writ petition of the petitioner and there appears to be no reason for bye passing the statutory remedy.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that petitioner, who was initially appointed on the post of Overseer was appointed by the Municipal Board, who is the competent authority to appoint the Overseer in the Municipal Board. The Section 308 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 also provides for appointment of engineers and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Sahai Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2333; 2003(3)WLC20
PARIHAR, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.(2). The petitioner was initially appointed as Rakshak in the Railway Protection Force vide order dated 12.10.1970. A chargesheet under Section 9(1)(i) of the RPF Act, 1957 read with Rule 44 of the RPF Rules, 1959 was served on the petitioner, vide memorandum dated 26.8.1982. The petitioner was required to submit his reply within 14 days of the receipt of the charge sheet. Before any reply could be filed by the petitioner within the stipulated time, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Section 47(b) of the Rules of 1957 vide memorandum dated 6.9.1982. In the said show cause notice it was observed that since the independent and reliable source are not inclined to get themselves exposed; as a result of which no independent evidence will be forthcoming; it was not reasonably practicable to follow the procedure prescribed under the above rules. Accordingly, conducting a departmental enquiry as envisaged under Rule 44 was...
Tag this Judgment!Ridhi Chand Meena Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1840; RLW2003(4)Raj2331; 2003(3)WLC37
Misra, J.1. The petitioner is the owner of a vehicle bearing No. RJ-25-1M-0052 which caused an accident as a result of which injury was sustained by the respondent No. 4 Dinesh Kumar. He filed an application for compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gangapurcity furnishing a certificate that he has suffered 20% injury which has caused permanent disability to him.2. An interim award of Rs. 25,000/- has therefore been passed in favour of injured respondent No. 4- Dinesh Kumar and the petitioner being a registered owner of the vehicle has been directed to pay this amount by way of interim compensation. This order is under challenge in this writ petition.3. The counsel for the petitioner, assailing the interim award of compensation, submitted that the petitioner had already executed a sale deed for this vehicle in favour of respondent No. 3 Banwari Lal and the vehicle was seized from the site of the accident. The charge sheet for this accident was also submitted against o...
Tag this Judgment!Kamal @ Kamal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj132; 2003(3)WLC445
Bansal, J.1. The instant appeal stems from the judgment dated December 21, 1996 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (prevention of Atrocities) cases and Additional Sessions Judge, Sawaimadhopur in Sessions Case No. 30/1996 whereby the convicted and sentenced the accused appellant Kamal @ Kamal Singh and co-accused Hari Singh who has not filed appeal against his conviction as under:-Kamal Singh under Section 302 IPC Life Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default t of fine to further undergo one year's rigorousprisonment.Hari Singh under Section 323 IPC Imprisonment for the period already udergone by him in detention 2. The appellant Kamal Singh and hari Singh were acquitted from the remaining charges and co-accused Kanhaiya was acquitted of all the charges framed against him.3. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution cases are that on April 27, 1996 parcha-bayan Ex.P4 of PW 4 Handu son of Ratanlal by caste Meena resident of Badolas who was undergoing treatment in General ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »