Rajasthan Court December 2004 Judgments
Har Bai and ors. Vs. Laxmi NaraIn and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC657; 2006ACJ2477
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the claimants-appellants against the award dated 13.5.1993 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dausa, in M.A.C.T. Claim No. 139 of 1989 for the enhancement of compensation awarded to the claimants.2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 21.10.1989 the deceased Ramji Lal aged 40 years was travelling towards Dausa on the roof of the bus No. RNA 5330. On account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus who abruptly applied the brakes causing the appellant to fall down, as a result of which the appellant sustained injuries and consequently died.3. Learned Counsel for appellants submits that the deceased was aged 40 years at the time of accident and his monthly income was assessed at Rs. 750 by the learned Tribunal. The Tribunal deducted one-third amount from Rs. 750 towards personal expenses and consequently determined the dependency/contribution for the family at Rs. 500. Learned Trib...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj441; 2005(2)WLC106
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner was a candidate in the election for Sarpanch for the Gram Pancnayat Raipur, Panchayat Samiti Raipur for which the elections were held on 31.1.2000. The petitioner's nomination paper was rejected by the Returning Officer on the ground that a child was born to him after cut off date i.e. 27.11.1995. The petitioner in his nomination paper disclosed that he had two sons Harsh and Abhishek. Harsh was given in adoption to Braham Dutt on 21.9.1993 by registered adoption deed. The petitioner also enclosed a copy of the said adoption deed and copy of ration card of Braham Dutt wherein the name of petitioner's son was very much there. The petitioner also produced the school certificate obtained from the school which also shows that the petitioner's son was shown as adopted son of said Braham Dutt.3. After election, the petitioner submitted an election petition on 28.2.2000 and prayed that it may be declared that the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Rajasthan Cricket Association and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj144; RLW2005(1)Raj590
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The petitioners, in the instant writ petitions seek to assail the validity of the Rajasthan Sports Association (Registration, Recognition and Regulation of Associations) Ordinance, 2004 (for short the 'Ordinance') which was promulgated and notified by the Governor of Rajasthan in the Gazette Notification dated August 18, 2004.2. The challenge is based on the following grounds:-(i) Exercise of power under Article 213 of the Constitution of India for promulgating the Ordinance was vitiated by non- existence of the conditions which control exercise of the powers by the Governor.(ii) The Ordinance represents an infraction of the petitioner's fundamental right guaranteed by Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution.(iii) The Ordinance is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, being unreasonable and arbitrary.ARTICLE 2133. In support of the first contention it is canvassed on behalf of the petitioners that the power under Article 213 is conditional and its exercise i...
Tag this Judgment!Ramu and ors. Vs. Hari Narayan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC807; 2005ACJ2053
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the award passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') dated 15.6.1993 in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 54 of 1990 which was filed by the appellants on account of death of Lada Devi, wife of Ramu, appellant No. 1, who died in a motor accident which took place on 4.11.1989 involving a jeep bearing registration No. RST 1466 which was being driven on the fateful day by respondent No. 1, owned by respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3, insurance company.2. The learned Tribunal assessed the dependency of the deceased as Rs. 500 per month and the age of the deceased at the time of accident as 35 years as such the annual dependency of Rs. 6,000 was multiplied by 16 and thus, on account of loss of income to the family as a result of death of the deceased an amount of Rs. 96,000 was arrived at. To that an amount of Rs. 15,000 was further awarded on account of loss of consortiu...
Tag this Judgment!Mehar Dairy Industries Vs. Chambali and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: I(2006)ACC372; 2005WLC(Raj)UC118
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. This writ petition came up before this Court on an application filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for vacation of stay order passed on 17th August, 2004. But, with the consent of parties, the matter has been finally heard.2. The petitioner has challenged award dated 8th December, 2003 (Annexure-5) passed by the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'Compensation Act'), whereby compensation for a sum of Rs. 2,98,526 has been awarded with interest @ 12% p.a. from 23rd January, 2003 the date of presentation of claim petition, and has also challenged order dated 10th June, 2004 (Annexure 8), whereby application filed by the petitioner under Order IX Rule 13, C.P.C., has been rejected by the prescribed authority.2. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (wife and son of deceased workman Sallah Khan) filed claim petition before the Commissioner under the Compensation Act for compensation in respect of death of Sallah K...
Tag this Judgment!Ramlal Bairwa Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj524; 2005(2)WLC95
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. This Special Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17th May, 2002 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B.C. Writ Petition No. 3076/02, whereby the writ petition of the appellant was dismissed.2. The petitioner-appellant filed a writ petition before this Court with a prayer to issue an appropriate writ order of direction directing the respondents to release the payment of compensation of Rs. 4,53,257/- immediately in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner averred in the writ petition that he is the member of Scheduled Caste. He was khatedar tenant of land bearing Khasra No. 410/1/1 measuring 19 biswa (2831 sq. yards residential and 43 sq. yards Barani). The said land was acquired by respondents. A notice Under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued to the petitioner (Annexure 1). Thereafter, a final award was passed and a sum of Rs. 4,53,257/- was awarded as compensation in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner further pleaded th...
Tag this Judgment!Manish Dixit Vs. Director General (Prisons) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj779; 2005(2)WLC465
Dalip Singh, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Manish Dixit who is undergoing the sentence awarded to him in Sessions Case No. 158/1994 having being convicted for offences under Sections 302,397 and 364 I.P.C. and 7/25(1)(a) of the Arms Act. The petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and lesser sentence for the other offences and at present he is lodged in Central Jail, Jaipur.2. The petitioner in this writ petition has sought the relief that in accordance with the provisions contained in the Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1972'), he is entitled to be sent to the Open Air Camp at Sanganer and he seeks a direction for being sent to the said Open Air Camp. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was taken in the custody on 12.07.1994. He has already served the sentence of seven years for the offence under Section 397 I.P.C. yet he has been...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Roadlines Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)IILLJ989Raj; RLW2005(2)Raj787; 2005(2)WLC205
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. This special appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22nd August, 2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B.C.W. Petition No. 3417/2000, whereby he dismissed the writ petition of the petitioner-appellant in limine.2. The petitioner-appellant filed a writ petition before this Court with a prayer to quash and set aside the impugned Order dated 30.3.2000 (Annexure 7 with the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 1, whereby State Government made a reference to Labour Court, Udaipur Under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act of 1947 hereinafter) for adjudication as to whether the termination of respondent No. 3 on 22.8.1997 by appellant was legal and justified. If not, then, for what relief the workman is entitled.3. The petitioner-appellant pleaded in the writ petition that respondent No. 3 filed a complaint before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Udaipur requesting therein to initiate conciliation proceedings and als...
Tag this Judgment!Basanti Mathur (Smt.) Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR105]; RLW2005(2)Raj938; 2005(1)WLC508
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 29.09.2003 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the letter dtd. 30.3.2002 (Annex. 2) passed by the Joint Director, Agriculture by which the order dtd. 25.6.1994 (Annex. 1) by which the petitioner's husband was granted the benefit of 3rd selection grade on completion of 27 years of service w.e.f. 15.11.1993 taking into consideration his services from 15.11.1966 was withdrawn and order dtd. 3.4.2002 (Annex.3), passed by Joint Director, Agriculture, Jodhpur by which recovery of a sum of Rs. 47,777/- was ordered to be recovered from the amount of gratuity, be quashed and set aside.2. It arises in the following circumstances:i) That the petitioner's husband late Shri Prakash Mathur (hereinafter referred to as the deceased employee) was initially appointed on adhoc basis on 15.11.1966 and thereafter he was selected throug...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: (2005)194CTR(Raj)121
Rajesh Balia, J. 1. These two appeals under Section 260A for asst. yrs. 1989-90 and 1991-92 and IT Ref. No. 58 of 1999 relating to the asst. yr. 1990-91 relates to the same controversy about the claim of the assessee to deduction of certain amount claimed by it as outright expenses incurred by it for the welfare of its employees under an obligation arising from the agreements between the assessee and its employees which were in operation during the relevant period and obligating the assessee to incur such expenses at the pains of punishment for non-compliance thereof under the Industrial Disputes Act.2. However, the audit report submitted by the auditors of the company shows that there was auditors' note that the expenses are not eligible for deduction for computing the total taxable income of the assessee under Section 40A(9) of the IT Act, 1961. The said provision reads as under:'40A(9) No deduction shall be allowed in respect of any sum paid by the assessee as an employer towards th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »