Rajasthan Court April 2004 Judgments
Nazir Mohammad Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3647
ORDERN.N. Mathur, J.1. By way of instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr. P. C. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 6-2-2002 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Bikaner whereby he has set aside the order dated 30th March, 1999 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No. 1, Bikaner acquitting the accused-petitioner for offences under Sections 420, 467 and 468 I. P. C. on the ground that for complete seven years the prosecution has failed to produce the witnesses to prove its case and send the matter back, with direction to proceed with in accordance with law.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.3. It appears that the petitioner himself was not appearing before the trial Court. In fact the proceedings continued upto the year 1997 because of the fault of the accused petitioner and not of the prosecution Witnesses could not be produced as summons were not served on them.4. The revisional Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Shiva Ram @ Shiva Lal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2712; 2004(3)WLC418
N.N. Mathur, J.1. These three appeals arises from the order of Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bikaner dated 12.02.2002, as such, they are decided by a common order.2. Thirteen appellants namely A-l Shiva Ram @ Shiva Lal, A-2 Peera Ram, A-3 Bishna Ram, A-4 Maga Ram, A-5 Chandu Ram, A-6 Ramu Ram, A-7 Lichman Ram, A-8 Kama Ram @ Kanhaiya Lal, A-9 Sunder Lal, A-10 Richpal @ Paliya, A-l1 Surja Ram, A-12 Girdhari Ram and A-13 Tiku Ram were sent for trial before the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bikaner in connection with murder of one Chuna Ram and for causing injuries to PW-2 Pema Ram and PW-4 Mst. Pani. They were tried for various offences. Appellants A-l Shiva Ram and A-2 Peera Ram have been convicted for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-; in default to payment to further undergo two months simple imprisonment, while remaining appellants have been acquitted...
Tag this Judgment!Ritesh Arya and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1990; 2004(3)WLC323
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition udder Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 1.9.2003 with, the prayer that by appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents No. 3 and 4, namely, Director, Computer Centre, Vighyan Bhawan, New Campus, Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur and the Registrar, Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur be restrained from charging extra fee of Rs. 16,000/- on the name of Self-Financing Course for Master of Computer Application and further, they be directed to treat the petitioner in the category of free seats in all the six semesters (3 years).2. The case of the petitioners as put forward by them in this writ petition is as follows:-The Jai Narain Vyas University published an advertisement (Annex. 1) whereby all concerned were informed that it was going to conduct the Rajasthan Master of Computer Application Admission Test (for short 'RMCAAT') on 29th June, 2003 and the petitioners ...
Tag this Judgment!Gayatri Devi (Smt.) Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1764; 2004(3)WLC297
K.S. Rathore, J.1. Brief facts of the case are that Smt. Ganga Devi wife of Ram Gopal executed a released deed on 16.12.1984 which was written on a stamp of Rs. 100/- and same was registered on 18.12.1984. Notice was issued to Smt. Ganga Devi directing her to make the payment of Rs. 18,626/- and to written the original document.2. Since Smt. Ganga Devi died during the proceeding, the petitioner being a beneficiary of the aforesaid properly, has filed this writ petition challenging the order passed by the Additional Collector (Stamps), Dausa dated 1st December, 1987 and the decision passed by the Board of Revenue dated 5.10.89 along with the demand notice issued pursuant to the aforesaid orders.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the document which was registered as released deed has wrongly been considered as conveyance (gift deed). He referred Clause 55 of the Rajasthan Stamps Law Adoption Act, 1952 wherein released deed is defined which is reproduced hereunder:-'Releas...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Raj229
ORDERSunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India on 6-8-2003 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the order dated 7-7-2003 (Annex. 6) passed by respondent No. 2 (Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Hanumangarh Junction) by which the Superintending Engineer (respondent No. 2) dismissed the appeal (Annex. 3) filed by the petitioner against respondent No. 4 (Madan Lal) and upheld the order dated 3-1-2002 (Annex. 2) passed by the respondent No. 3 (executive Engineer, Irrigation Division-II, Hanumangarh) by which respondent No. 3 (Executive Engineer) allowed the application filed by respondent No. 4 (Madan Lal) and sanctioned another Naka (drain) from the khasra No. 512/434 belonging to the petitioner for supplying water to his agricultural field situated in Khasra No. 513/434 be quashed and set aside.2. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. S.K. Golecha
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(Raj)337; [2004]270ITR379(Raj)
1. On an application under Section 27(1) of the WT Act, the Tribunal has referred the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CWT(A) directing the AO to take the value of Prem Prakash Cinema building as per finding of first appellate authority for asst. yr. 1979-80 by making enhancement by 10 per cent in each assessment year over the value adopted for the earlier years ?' 2. The assessee-HUF is a partner in a partnership firm of M/s S. Zoraster & Co. which, Inter alia, owns an immovable property known as Prem Prakash cinema building. The assessee-HUF declared the value of its interest in the said immovable property at minus figure whereupon the WTO made a reference under Section 16A of the Act to the valuation cell of the Department. The District Valuation Officer valued the said property at positive figures and estimated the value of assessee's interest therein accordingly.3. The assessee app...
Tag this Judgment!Maa Durga Shikshan Sansthan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2311; 2004(4)WLC131
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 4.3.2004 with the prayerthat by appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 5.1.2004 (Annex.P/1) passed by the respondent No. 2 Dy. Secretary, Education (Group-I) Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur by which the petitioner was denied NOC for running B.Ed. Course for the Academic Session 2004-05, be quashed and set aside and it may be heldthat the petitioner is entitled to get renewal of NOC from respondent State of Rajasthan for the B.Ed. Course for the Academic Session 2004-05 and also entitled to getrecognition from respondent No. 4 Northern Regional Committee, National Council for Teacher Education (N.C.T.E.), Jaipur irrespective of renewal of NOC from State of Rajasthan.2. The case of the petitioner as put forward by it in this writ petition is as follows:-The petitioner is a registered society under the Rajasthan Soc...
Tag this Judgment!Subhash Mohan Mathur Vs. State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2340; 2004(3)WLC305
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The petitioner being a graduate in Sociology applied for the post of Lecturer and was selected on the post of Lecturer on regular basis by the RPSC on 30.7.92 and was also confirmed with effect from 1.12.76. In the seniority list prepared by the respondent on 31.3.77, the petitioner's name find place at serial No. 87. Vide order dated 12.2.80, the petitioner was transferred on deputation to Rajasthan Police Academy from Raj Rishi College, Alwar. The deputation period was further extended for one year vide order dated 7.5.1981. Ultimately, on 17.11.1983, the petitioner was absorbed as Lecturer in sociology in Rajasthan Police Academy and presently working there.2. The controversy in this writ petition is with regard to non fixing and not revising the pay scale of the petitioner and the respondents are also not applying the recommendation of the U.G.C. regarding revision of pay scale which was made applicable with effect from 1.9.1976 and in view of UGC recommendation,...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sita and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ2212
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Out of eight appeals, four appeals have been preferred by the appellant New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (for short 'the insurance company'), whereas four have been preferred by the to claimants to challenge the award dated 10.4.2002 by which the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pali in six claim cases iled by the claimants, decided the claim petitions by a common award.2. Brief facts of the case are that six sets lided with a trailer which was lying in theof the claimants submitted claim petitions left side of the road. It is said that Chhotu as a number of persons were travelling in the truck No. RJ 19-C 0334 in the night of 9/10.6.1994 which met with an accident with a truck-trailer resulting in death of Lumba Ram and Dhagala Ram and injuries Bhanwar Lal, Laxman Nath, Dalpat Ram and Pyari Bai. The relevant facts for the purpose of deciding these appeals are that at the relevant time, respondent Pema Ram was driving the above-mentioned truck and because of rash and ne...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Reported in: III(2004)ACC388; RLW2004(4)Raj2549; 2004(3)WLC358
Sunil Kumar Garg, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 17.3.2004 with the prayer that by appropriate writ, order or direction, the Resolution dated 5.3.2004 (Annex. 7) passed by the respondent No. 2 Regional Transport Authority, Sikar by which two stage carriage permits on the inter-state route Rajgarh-Hissar Via Jhumpa were granted one in favour of respondent No. 3 Bharat Singh on the ground of being Ex-service man and the other in favour of the respondent No. 4 Subesingh on the ground of being a member of Scheduled Caste category, be quashed and set aside.2. The case of the petitioner as put forward by him in this writ petition is as follows:-In supersession of earlier agreement, the State of Rajasthan and State of Haryana entered into a new inter-state reciprocal transport agreement on 9.7.1997, which was published in the Rajasthan Gazette through Notification dated 15.7.1997, a co...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »