Rajasthan Court December 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.
Kiran Devi and ors. Vs. Bhoora and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-10-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC841
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 30.9.1994 in Claim Case No. 1314/1990 whereby a sum of Rs. 2,06,000/- was awarded by way of compensation to the claimant-appellants on account of the death of Jagdish Saxena, husband of the appellant No. 1 and father of the appellant Nos. 2 to 5 who died as a result of the injuries suffered by him in a motor accident involving the offending vehicle (truck) bearing registration No. RJR-2629 on 12.9.1990.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that compensation awarded, is inadequate and is liable to be enhanced as the learned Tribunal failed to take into account the fact that deceased was an employee of the Municipal Corporation, Jaipur as Naikedar and even though his age has been determined as 50 years at the time of accident, he had sufficiently long career ahead of him. In which his salary and income was liable to be increased on a...
Ram Karan Vs. Mooli Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-10-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC745
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the award dated 25.11.1992 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, Distt. Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'The Tribunal') in Claim Petition No. 2/1992 filed by the claimant respondent Nos. 1 to 8 whereby the application under Order 9 Rule 13, C.P.C. filed by the appellant who was the owner of the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. RJL 4848 was dismissed and the learned Tribunal declined to set aside the ex parte award.2. The submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant was alleged to be the owner of the offending vehicle (Truck) RJL 4848. It is alleged that in fact, he was not the registered owner thereof. He submits that the service of the summon was also not effected upon the appellant and the learned Tribunal has erred on passing the award ex parte against the appellant.3.1 have perused the record and the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has given the cogent ...
Prayag Chand Vs. Land Acquisition Officer and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1234; 2005(3)WLC143
Rajesh Balia, J.1. This appeal is directed against the determination of the question of court fees, by the learned Single Judge that is payable in an appeal preferred by a claimant against the award of compensation by the District Court Under Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in a reference made Under Section 18 of the Act of 1894.2. The appellant has preferred an appeal Under Section 54 of the Act of 1894 against the determination of compensation by the learned District Judge to the extent he was aggrieved of it. The appeal was presented on the court fee of Rs. 2/-. The appellant has also not mentioned the value and subject matter of the appeal. The office raised an objection that the memo of appeal does not show the subject matter and value of the appeal and that the court fee payable on the memo of appeal against the award of compensation by the District Judge Under Section 23 is ad valorem on the value of the subject matter of the appeal. In support of this objection, a ...
A.V.V.N.L. and ors. Vs. Smt. Sarli and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC93; AIR2005Raj248; RLW2005(2)Raj1103; 2005(1)WLC495
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This is the first appeal filed by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 26.4.2000 whereby the learned Additional District Judge, Neem Ka Thana, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,33,700/- with interest @ 12% per annum from 3.6.1996 till payment, as compensation.2. The material facts alleged in the plaint are that, on 19.6.1996, at about 8-9 PM, Raji Ram, aged 45 years, while returning to his village, came in contact with electric wire lying there resulting into his death at the spot. Raji Ram, on account of darkness, could not see the live electric wire. This all happened on account of negligence of the officers, i.e., Defendants Nos. 2 to 4, of the defendant No. 1-the then Rajasthan State Electricity Board. The claimants are the mother, wife, sons and daughters of deceased Raji Ram. They made a claim of Rs. 24,95,800/- with interest @ 24% per annum.3. Vide written statement, all the averments made in the plaint were denied with a plea that on account of heavy rains...
Manorama Devi and ors. Vs. Mohan Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: III(2005)ACC150; 2006ACJ1967
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the claimants-appellants against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tonk, dated 27.5.1994 in M.A.C.T. Claim Case No. 12 of 1988 for the enhancement of the award passed by the learned Tribunal.2. Brief facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that on 18.8.1987 the deceased Naresh Chand Bansal, husband of Mano-rama Devi, appellant No. 1, father of the appellant Nos. 2 to 4 and son of appellant Nos. 5 and 6 was going in his car bearing registration No. RND 9318 from Jaipur to Jhalawar. The said car was being driven by the deceased. He met with an accident with a bus bearing registration No. RNP 960 belonging to Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the R.S.R.T.C), respondent No. 2 which was being driven by Mohan Lai, respondent No. 1. It was the case of the appellant that bus in question was being driven rashly and negligently by the driver Mohan Lai, respondent No. 1, at the time of...
Ram Narayan Vs. Sitaram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC308
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 18.4.1995 in Claim Case No. 223/1991 for enhancement of compensation that was awarded to the appellant by the learned Tribunal on account of the injuries suffered by him in a road accident on account of the rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 Sitaram, the driver of the truck bearing registration No. RRM 8919. Respondent No. 2 Anil Kumar is the owner of the truck and the vehicle was insured with respondent No. 3 Oriental Insurance Company Limited. On account of the said accident, the appellant suffered multiple injuries including fracture of the right elbow as would be evident from the; injury report (Exhibit 4) placed on the record. In all the appellant suffered three injuries. As per the Certificate (Exhibit-13), issued by Dr. MX Mathur (AW-5), the appellant suffered 8% disability on account of fracture on the right arm.2. The learned Counse...
Harminder Singh Vs. Gopal Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ2497
Dalip Singh, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the common award dated 21.8.1990 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Claim Petition No. 499 of 1986 filed by the appellant Harminder Singh for the compensation in respect to the injuries suffered by him and Claim Case No. 500 of 1986 was filed by the appellant Balveer Singh for compensation on account of the injuries suffered by him in an accident which took place on 12.11.1985 while travelling in car bearing registration No. MXY 1932 from Jaipur to Delhi on Jaipur-Delhi Highway nearabout Shahpura. When the said car met with an accident with a tanker (truck) bearing registration No. RNM 2995 which was alleged to have been driven rashly and negligently by Gopal Singh, respondent No. 1, as a result of the aforesaid injuries, appellants submitted the aforesaid two separate claim petitions before Tribunal.Appeal No. 304 of 1991:2. Appeal No. 304 of 1991 has been filed by appell...
Manorma Devi and ors. Vs. Mohan Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC150
Dallip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the claimant-appellants against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk dated 27.5.1994 in MACT Claim Case No. 12/1988 for the enhancement of the award passed by the learned Tribunal.2. Brief facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that on August 18, 1987 the deceased Naresh Chandra Bansal, husband of the appellant No. 1 Smt. Manorma Devi, father of the appellant Nos. 2 to 4 and son of appellant Nos. 5 and 6 was going, in his car bearing registration No. RND-9318 from Jaipur to Jhalawar. The said car was being driven by the deceased. He met with an accident with a bus bearing registration No. RNP-960 belonging to Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the R.S.R.T.C') respondent No. 2 which was being driven by Mohan Lal, respondent No. 1. It was the case of the appellant that bus in question was being driven rashly and negligently by the driver Mohan Lal, respondent No. 1 at the ti...
R.S.R.T.C. and anr. Vs. Manorma Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC798
Dalip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and its Depot Manager against the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Tonk dated 27.5.1994 in Claim Case No. 12/1988.2. The appellants Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation in this appeal have challenged the finding of the learned Tribunal with regard to the negligence of driver Mohan Lai, respondent No. 7. It has been noticed in the award passed by the learned Tribunal immediately after the issues have been reproduced on page 4 of the certified copy of the judgment of learned Tribunal, that the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, appellants herein, who were the non-claimant before the learned Tribunal, did not lead any evidence. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, when no evidence has been led by the appellants before the learned Tribunal, and they failed to discharge the burden, there appears to be no justification for accepting the arg...
Sushila Devi (Smt.) Vs. Smt. Bhagoti Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-08-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1194; 2005(2)WLC634
Khem Chand Sharma, J.1. Since both the appeals relate to the election held for the post of ward member and Chair-person of Municipal Board Kotputali, District Jaipur for the year 2000 and involve similar facts and evidence. Therefore, both the appeals are decided by this single judgment.2. Sushila Devi and Bhagoti Devi contested the election for the post of member of Municipality, Kotputali from ward No. 5 in which Sushila Devi was declared elected as member of ward No. 5. Smt. Kanta Devi was also elected as ward member from Ward No. 10. After the elections for membership were over, the elections for the Chairman of Municipality Kotputali were held on ,22.8.2000 in which Sushila Devi, Kanta Devi and Smt. Prem Devi contested the elections and Sushila Devi was declared elected as Chairman.3. Bhagoti Devi and Kanta Devi by filing separate election petitions challenged the election of Sushila Devi for the post of Ward Member and Chairman and prayed for quashing her election as ward member ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »