Rajasthan Court November 2004 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.
Brij Bihari and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-22-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj821; 2005(2)WLC457
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment and Order dated 26.10.2002 passed by Additional Session Judge No. 1 (Fast Track) Jaipur City, Jaipur in session case No. 8/2002 whereby the learned Trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants Brij Bihari and Smt. Primila for the offence under Section 302 IPC to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo for rigorous imprisonment of 6 months, under Section 120B IPC to undergo the imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1000/-and in default of payment of fine to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and also under Section 201 I.P.C. to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. The D.B. Criminal appeal No. 6/2003 has been filed on behalf of the accused-appellants Brij Bihari and Smt, Primila through counsel whereas D.B. Criminal J...
Guru Bachan Vs. State Election Commission and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-16-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1208; 2005(2)WLC420
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is as under: -'(i) quash and set aside the Order dated 10.11.2004 passed by respondent rejecting the nomination form of the petitioner;(ii) direct the respondent to allow the petitioner to contest the municipal election in Ward No. 30, Beawer to be held on 24.11.2004 and(iii) pass such other Orders which may be in the interest of justice and for preventing miscarriage of justice in this case and which may be deemed just and proper in the particular circumstances of this case.'2. Brief re 'sume' of the case is that after the Municipal Election in the year 2004 was announced the petitioner submitted his nomination form on November 8, 2004. In the affidavit annexed with the nomination-form the petitioner clearly stated that the cognizance under Sections 147, 148, 325, 365, 120B and 384 IPC in FIR No. 114/1996 registered with Police Station Kalu District Pali was taken against him and the charge had been fram...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Nand Lal Saras ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj112; 2005(2)ARBLR102(Raj); RLW2005(2)Raj946; 2005(2)WLC682
ORDERDinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This revision petition directed against the Order dated 10th February, 2003 passed by the learned trial Court has been submitted by the defendant petitioners with the submissions, inter alia, that the plaintiff-non-petitioner has put his Bus bearing registration No. RJ 19 P 2634 with the petitioners for a period of one year under a contract executed between the parties. The plaintiff-non-petitioner has filed the suit for recovery of an amount of Rs. 17.000/- in the civil Court against the petitioners. The petitioners filed an application before the learned trial Court to the effect that as the contract executed between the parties contains an arbitration clause, therefore, the suit, was not maintainable and a prayer for appointment of arbitrator was made. The plaintiff non petitioner did not file reply to the said application but agreed for reference of the dispute to the arbitrator, however, with the prayer that till the adjudication of the dispute by the ...
Girdhari and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1353; 2005(2)WLC164
N.K. Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12th May, 2000 passed by Shri R.P. Singh, Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur, in Sessions Case No. 76/99 whereby all the accused appellants have been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 302/34IPC to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo for simple imprisonment of one month.2. The brief facts of the case that on the basis of Parcha Bayan of Smt. Jagani (Ex.P-15) a First Information Report No. 169/99 (Ex.P-20) was registered at Police Station Chauth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur wherein it was alleged that she is illiterate. She came one day prior to Rakhi to her father's village Bandha. Her elder brother Ramvilas had died about 9 months ago and her father Kanhaiya Lal had also died about two and half months ago. Therefore, she came on the festival of Rakhi. She further stated that her younger brother Babu was not available at...
Superintending Engineer (O and M) and anr. Vs. Akhilesh Kumar and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj55; 2005(2)WLC424
Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners against the respondents on 25.4.2003 with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned judgment and award dated 23.9.2002 (Annex.5) passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court, Bikaner (respondent No. 2) by which termination of services of the respondent No. 1 Akhilesh Kumar through termination order dated 18.11.2000 (Annex.13) was held to be improper and illegal and thus, the termination order dated 18.11.2000 (Annex. 13) was set aside and the respondent No. 1 was ordered to be reinstated back in service.2. The case of the petitioners as put forward by them in this writ petition is as follows:On the request of the respondent No. 1, the State Government through Notification dated 17.10.2001 referred the dispute to the respondent No. 2 Labour Court, Bikaner to the effect whether the termination of services of the respondent No. 1 Akhilesh Kuma...
Smt. Prem Kanwar Vs. Chand Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj87; RLW2005(2)Raj817; 2005(2)WLC702
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This is the first appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 3-11-2003 whereby plaintiffs suit for possession and permanent injunction was decreed by Learned District Judge (Fast Track) No. 4, Jaipur City, Jaipur.2. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for possession, permanent injunction and damages on 13-9-1990 with the averments that both the plaintiff and the defendant (brother and sister) are residing in house No. 2305 at Jaipur. The plaintiff and the defendant are respectively in possession of the portions shown with yellow colour and brown colour in the map annexed to the plaint (Exhibit-1), that the disputed room of 15' x 10' in south east corner is in the ownership of the plaintiff. The plaintiff allowed the defendant to use this room as and when required. Thereafter the defendant demolished some portion of eastern wall of this room. Hence, the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction with an application for temporary injunction in J...
Mangu Singh (by Lrs) Vs. Banki Das (by L.Rs.)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj109; RLW2005(2)Raj949; 2005(2)WLC263
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.2. This review petition is against the order dated 7-7-2004 passed by this Court dismissing the SBCMA No. 18/2004.3. Brief facts of the case are that, a suit for eviction from the rented premises was filed by the plaintiff Ramji Lal against Mangu Singh and ors. The suit was decreed by the trial Court on 30-9-1994. During pendency of the suit, respondent-plaintiff died on 21-5-1988. The appellants, after seven months from time of death of the respondent, Submitted an application seeking permission to implead legal representatives of the respondent before the first appellant Court. The application was not supported by any affidavit and further, no application or affidavit for condonation of delay was filed by the appellants. Even there was no prayer for setting aside of the abatement of appeal in the application. Before above application could be decided by the Court, the appeal was dismissed in default on 7-1-1999.4. Acc...
Mohd. Akram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj142; RLW2005(2)Raj1211; 2005(1)WLC655
ORDERK.S. Rathore, J.1. Brief facts giving rise to this ease are that the petitioner was elected as Ward Member of Ward No. 3 of Municipality Council, Sikar in the general election held in November 2004.2. A report was lodged against the petitioner with the police station Kotwali, Sikar on 16-9-1999 and the FIR No. 391/99 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 147, 148, 332, 352 and 427, IPC.3. On account of FIR lodged against the petitioner, he was placed under suspension by the respondents while exercising power under Section 63 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act of 1959') vide order dated 25-9-1999.4. The suspension order dated 25-9-1999 was challenged by the petitioner by way of filing writ petition before this Court and the same was registered as SB civil writ petition No. 5413/1999. After investigation in the matter, charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner for the offences under Section 147, 332 and 353, IPC b...
Shreyans Gems (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-08-2004
Reported in: (2005)195CTR(Raj)341
K.S. Rathore, J.1. Since both the aforesaid writ petitions involve common legal as well as factual questions, at the request of both the parties, they are being decided by this common order.2. The Writ Petn. No. 312 of 2004 has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers :'1. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction in nature thereof may be issued for directing the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to stay the recovery of demand vide letter dt. 28th/29th Aug., 2003 (Annex. 1), and notice dt. 15th Dec., 2003 (Annex. 2);2. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, a Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to grant stay of demand of Rs. 60 lakhs and odd till disposal of settlement application by the Settlement Commission appeal;3. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent No. 4 be directed to adjourn hearing of appeal sine die to be taken up for hearing after order under Section 24...
Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-08-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(3)Raj1944; 2005(1)WLC533
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 26.8.2003 with the prayer that by an, appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned directions contained in clause (1) of Circular dated 16.8.2003 (Annex, p/5) issued by the Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner (respondent No. 2) directing that for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III, marks obtained in compulsory subjects of Vocational Course as well as marks obtained in optional subjects of Bridge Course would be taken into consideration, be quashed and set aside and further, the respondents be directed to prepare a fresh selection list ignoring directions contained in clause (1) of Circular Annex. P/5 dated 16.8.2003 and if the petitioner comes in merit, he may be given appointment.2. The case of the petitioner as putforward by him in this writ petition is as follows:The petitioner pass...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »