Rajasthan Court November 2004 Judgments
Tara Kanwar Vs. Bhagwan Sahai and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-30-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC808; 2006ACJ1715
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the award dated 8.8.1994 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Distt., Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in the Claim Petition No. 89 of 1992 by which a sum of Rs. 1,45,000 has been awarded as compensation to the appellant for the death of the husband of Tara Kanwar, appellant.2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 6.5.1990 the deceased Mool Singh aged 25 years was driving his truck No. PJA 6893 from Jaipur towards Chomu. It is submitted that at about 10.30 p.m. another truck bearing registration No. DIG 2215 which was being driven by Bhagwan Sahai, respondent No. 1, collided with the truck being driven by the deceased Mool Singh as a result of which Mool Singh, the husband of the appellant, died as a result of the injuries received by him in the said accident.3. The sole contention raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the learned Tribunal applied the multiplier o...
Tag this Judgment!Usha Vs. Hari Ram Raigar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-30-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC786
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal arises out of the award dated 29.10.194 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Claim Petition No. 566/1990 by which a sum of Rs. 25,000/- has been awarded along with interest @ 12% per annum to the appellant on account of injuries suffered by her.2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on'9.11.1989 the appellant, was going in an auto-rickshaw bearing registration No. RNP 1655 at about 1.00 p.m. and on reaching Sisodia Garden, a jeep bearing registration No. RJL 6708 came from the opposite direction which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver Hari Ram, the respondent No. 1, struck the auto-rickshaw in which the appellant was travelling as a result of the accident, the appellant received multiple injuries including a fracture of the left elbow, which had resulted in 39% disability as assessed by the Medical Board, constituted at SMS Medical College and Hospit...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Chandra Vs. Avtar Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-30-2004
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC674
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal arises out of the award dated 18.4.1995 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Claim Petition No. 394/1989 filed by the claimant-appellant for compensation on account of injury suffered by him in a motor accident which took place on 11.9.1998.2. During the pendency of this appeal by an order dated 10.3.2004 this Court had dispensed with the service of notice on respondent Nos. 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the vehicle in question and the appeal has been contested by the insurer, the New India Insurance Company Ltd. Branch, Neharu Place, Tonk Road, Jaipur, as respondent No. 3.3. The case of the appellant is that the learned Tribunal has awarded a meagre sum of Rs. 5,000/- only in all despite the fact that it has come oil record that the appellant suffered dislocation of the right hip joint which has resulted in 14% disability of the right lower limb. Learned Counsel for the app...
Tag this Judgment!Arvind Singh Vs. Kajodmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-30-2004
Reported in: II(2006)ACC52
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the award dated 17th May, 1995 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur in Motor Accident Claims Case No. 573/1991 whereby a sum of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty 9 thousand only) was awarded to the appellant for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. The appellant seeks enhancement of the compensation.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 19th December, 1990 the appellant met with an accident, while riding on a Scooter No. RRX-6020 was struck by a jeep bearing registration No. RNB-1497 as a result of which the appellant suffered h multiple injuries. It has further come in evidence that as a result of the aforesaid injuries, the abdomen of the appellant was ripped open and, consequently, operated upon in which his spleen had to be removed and his one kidney was partially damaged. As a result of the said accident, the appellant remained under treatment in the hospital from 19th December, 1990 to 29th December,...
Tag this Judgment!Arvinder Singh Vs. Kajodmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-30-2004
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC23
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the award dated 17.5.1995 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tibunal, Jaipur in Motor Accident Claims Case No. 573/1991 whereby a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) was awarded to the appellant for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. The appellant seeks enhancement of the compensation.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.12.1990 the appellant met with an accident, while riding on a Scooter No. RRX 6020 was struck by a jeep bearing registration No. RNB 1497 as a result of which the appellant suffered multiple injuries. It has further come in evidence that as a result of the aforesaid injuries, the abdomen of the appellant was ripped open and, consequently, was operated upon in which his spleen had to be removed and his one kidney was partially damaged. As a result of the said accident, the appellant remained under treatment in the hospital from 19.12.1990 to 29.12.1990. The claimant-appellant a...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Giri Vs. Judge, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-29-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR1058]; 2005(3)SLJ267(Raj); 2005(2)WLC169
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India on 5.3.2004 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the judgment and award dated 8.10.2003 (Annexure-1) passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court, (respondent No. 1) by which the learned Labour Court (respondent No. 1) treating the second reference as illegal and without going into merits of the case, rejected the reference, be quashed and set aside.2. The learned Labour Court while rejecting the second reference in the case of the petitioner has placed reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Virendra Bhandari v. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, 2001(1) LLJ. (Rajs) 396, wherein this Court has held that the appropriate Government is not competent to make second reference of the same dispute as the same is barred by principles of res judicata and upheld the order passed by the Si...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanwar Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1091; 2005(2)WLC441; 2004WLC(Raj)UC775
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Brief facts of the case are that one Narayan Singh lodged a written report at Police Station Kotwali, Sikar on 26th May, 1987 stating therein that his sister Smt. Raj Kanwar was married with accused-petitioner Bhanwar Singh. The marriage was solemnized on 10th Feb., 1985 and dowry was also given to Bhanwar Singh at the time of marriage. After about 10 days the accused-petitioner Bhanwar Singh started beating his sister Raj Kanwar and accused demanded more dowry. When the informant received this information, he went to Sikar and there he came to know that Bhanwar Singh was already married before his marriage with Raj Kanwar and further he has solemnized one more marriage on 13th May, 1987. In the complaint, he further said that the accused used to beat and sent Raj Kanwar to Jaipur, but the complainant used to pacify the matter and he took Raj Kanwar to Sikar many a times. The complainant further stated that Bhanwar Singh took his sister to Delhi and put her in hotel...
Tag this Judgment!Chauthu Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1051; RLW2005(2)Raj775; 2005(1)WLC663
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J.1. The facts of the case are that the complainant-Manga Ram submitted a criminal complaint under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467 and 468, I.P.C. read with Section 120B. I.P.C. against 11 persons alleging therein that the complainant and the accused Nos. 1 to 4 namely, Ramu, Chautu, Sua and Chhotu were the co-sharers in agricultural land bearing Khasra Nos. 231/1, 432/1, 426, 381 and 189 situated in village Sunariya and Dalatpura. Since the complainant-Manga Ram was not keeping the good health, therefore, his all four brothers (accused) were cultivating the land. The complainant, in his complaint, stated that the accused Nos. 2 to 4 were not giving share in the crop also and they started quarrelling with him. Not only this but the accused persons by forging thump impression of the complainant, sold the land by registered sale deed dated 14-7-1982. In the complaint, it is submitted that out of two accused, Jeevan and Kushla, one put his thumb impression representing him...
Tag this Judgment!Grapes Synthetics Private Limited Vs. the Judge, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR935]; RLW2005(2)Raj942; 2005(1)WLC738
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India on 26.9.2002 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the order dtd. 18.1.2001 (Annex.1) by which application filed by the petitioner for permitting it to be represented by a lawyer was rejected and the order dtd. 6.9.2001 (Annex.2) passed by the learned Labour Court (respondent No. 1) by which a prayer was made that the petitioner-firm be allowed to be represented through Shri J.P. Patodia was rejected, be quashed and set aside.2. It arises in the following circumstances:That the respondent No. 2 (Rajendra) raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer, Bhilwara alleging therein that he was engaged in March, 1995 as Salesman under the petitioner-firm, but his services were terminated w.e.f. 7.8.1998. The conciliation proceedings failed and the matter was referred to the Labour Court (respondent No. 1) f...
Tag this Judgment!Nemichand Burad and anr. Vs. Shri Jorawarmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj235; RLW2005(2)Raj1096; 2005(2)WLC660
K.S. Rathore, J.1. This writ petition is filed before the principal seat of High Court at Jodhpur. The learned single Judge vide order dated 27.11.2003 after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and considering this fact that the petitioners are not given reasonable opportunity to file the written statement as well as in the interest of justice has given one opportunity to take written statement on record on the cost of Rs. 3000/-. The petition was disposed of at admission stage.2. Against the order dated 27.11.2003 respondent Nos. 1 and 2 preferred an appeal before the Division Bench and the same was registered as D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 54/2004. The Division Bench of this Court has set aside the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 27.11.2003 and the writ petition was returned with the direction to the registry to transfer the writ petition to Jaipur Bench. The Division Bench has considered the submissions made on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »