Rajasthan Court July 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.
S.C. Malhotra Vs. Smt. Bilam Kanwar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-20-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj658; 2004(4)WLC322
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This civil misc. appeal under Section 22 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1950) has been filed by the defendant-tenant (appellant) against the order dtd. 5.4.2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur by which in a suit filed under Section 6 of the Act of 1950 for determination of standard rent, the learned Additional Dist. Judge determined the provisional rent of the suit premises @ Rs. 3,000/- per month in place of Rs. 200/- per month.2. It arises in the following circumstances:i) That the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit under Section 6 of the Act of 1950 for determination of the standard rent of the house No. 786, situated at Chopasani Road, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the house in question) alleging inter alia that in the lower storey of that house in question, the appellant-plaintiff for last more than 40 years. It was further stated that the rented pr...
Kesar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4688; RLW2004(4)Raj2556; 2004(4)WLC536
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Appellant seeks to set aside the judgment dated march 23, 2001 passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Bhilwara whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short N.D.P.S. Act, 1985) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-; in default of fine, to further suffer simple imprisonment of six months.2. In brief, the facts of the case are that Naka Bandi was conducted under the direction of the District Opium Officer, Bhilwara on January 9, 1993 on the Bhilwara-Chittorgarh Road, around 5.30 PM a truck was checked. On being inquired, it was found that appellant was driver of the truck and one Harnek Singh was Khalasi who disclosed that opium in a polythene bag was concealed under the rear seat of the Driver. Search was conducted by Prakash Saxena and opium in polythene bag weighing 5 Kgs. was found in tool box. Two samples of 24 grams each ...
Jagbir Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2727; 2004(4)WLC301
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant appeal impugns the judgment dated December 2, 2000 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Chittorgarh whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'NDPS' Act) to suffer Rule 1. for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default to further suffer R.I. for two years.2. The prosecution story runs as under:-3. Mr. R.C. Kaushal, Superintendent, Central Narcotics Bureau. Branch Singoli, on receiving the information regarding transit of opium in a jeep, proceeded to the spot on May 15, 1998. During the course of Nakabandi, four persons namely Jagbir Singh, Om Prakash, Mukhtyar Singh and Narendra Singh were found sitting in a jeep. Search of jeep was conducted and in the cavity under the driver's seat of the jeep, opium weighing 8 Kgs. and 600 gms. was found which was seized and sealed. The statement of all the four persons got recorded, they were arrested and complaint wa...
Anil Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2736; 2004(4)WLC508
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant appeals arise out of the judgment dated November 22, 2001 of the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases Chittorgarh rendered in Sessions cases No. 7/98, whereby each of the appellants were convicted and sentenced under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act') to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. one lac in default to further undergo imprisonment for one year.2. The prosecution story as woven is tike this Devi Lal Inspector Central Narcotic Bureau Jhalawar Camp Chittorgarh instituted a complaint against the appellants Anil and Madhu, wherein it was alleged that on November 6, 1997 Madan Lal Meena on receiving a secret information reached at the spot and found four persons sitting in a hut of Madhu. Two of them ran away, but Madhu and Anil were apprehended. The search was taken and 3.600gm. and 4.600gm. Opium was recovered from their pos- session. Necessary memos were drawn and aft...
Chand Bihari Sharma Vs. the District Judge and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR402]; RLW2005(1)Raj183; 2004(4)WLC538
K.S. Rathore, J. 1. The petitioner is son of late Shri Radhey Shyam Sharma, who was a permanent employee of the erstwhile Rajasthan Electricity Board and on attaining the superannuary age retired from RSEB and the pension was granted in favour of the petitioner. On 13.5.2002 the petitioner expired, therefore, the petitioner applied for family pension. 2. The petitioner's younger brother Shri Ram Bihari Sharma is a mentally retarded person since his birth. The brother of the petitioner is not in a mental status to look after himself and is looked after by the petitioner. As the petitioner is lawfully entitled for family pension, therefore, he applied for family pension before the competent authority. 3. It is informed vide Annex.2 by the respondents to submit the guardianship certificate. On receipt of the said letter the petitioner moved an application under Guardianship and Wards Act for appointment as a Guardian of Ram Bihari in the Court of District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur and th...
Heer Singh and ors. Vs. Jai Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC718; 2006ACJ1858; RLW2005(1)Raj236; 2005(1)WLC293
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This civil misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1988) has been filed by the claimants appellants against the judgment and award dtd. 15.5.1989 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur in Claim Cases No. 106/85 and 85/1986 by which he awarded a sum of 60,000/- as compensation to the claimants - appellants on account of death of Smt. Madan Kumari (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) and Rs. 200/- on account of damage caused to the Hero Majestic Moped No. RRN 4059 (hereinafter referred to as the Moped in question), but this appeal has been filed by the appellants'- claimants who are legal representatives of the deceased for enhancement of the amount of compensation.2. It arises in the following circumstances:i) That the appellants - claimants filed claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal), on 9.12.87 cl...
Chandrakanta (Smt.) Vs. Raj. Small Industries Corpn. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-16-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj70
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Prayer of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is as under:-(i) to quash the order dated July 6, 2002 and the order dated June 28, 2002 to the extent of denying payments to the petitioner;(ii) to direct the respondent to release the amount of difference of salary, allowance, encashment of PL, Gratuity (Rs. 4,02,008) and other post retrial benefits.2. Contextual facts depict that late husband of the petitioner Shri Raj Kumar Mishra entered in the service of respondent Corporation on July 1,1974 and continued to work till his death i.e. May 8, 2002. The husband of petitioner working as Senior Assistant was transferred and posted in Carpet Cell in Head Officer, Jaipur vide order dated May 27, 2000.The husband of petitioner was served with the order dated June 9, 2000 whereby the enquiry was contemplated against him and he was placed under suspension. The memorandum dated June 22, 2000 along with the charge sheet was served on him. In respect of same charges ...
In Re: Ladnun Agrl. Farms (P.) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-16-2004
Reported in: [2005]57SCL372(Raj)
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. In the petition, the prayer has been made that the compromise/ arrangement of amalgamation of Transferor companies in the transferee company, may be sanctioned so as to be binding on all the equity shareholders and creditors of the petitioner company.2. On the notice of the petition, the Regional Director, Northern Region, Department of Company Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Kanpur has submitted an affidavit stating therein that the Central Government has no objection to the sanction of the proposed scheme of amalgamation and the case may be decided by the Court on merits.3. The Official Liquidator submitted his report in the matter on 11 -9-2002. In the report he has raised two fold objections against the sanction of scheme of amalgamation of the transferor companies in the transferee company. The first objection is regarding the fractional shares to be payable to the shareholders in addition to the proposed exchange ratio in respect of Transferor Companies and ...
Bank of Rajasthan Retired Staff Society Vs. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-16-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj133; 2004(4)WLC331
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Prayer of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is as under:-(i) to direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum to its retired employees who opted for pension and its commutation and who have been made delayed payment of these benefits as stated in the writ petition.2. Contextual facts depict that the members of the petitioner Society are returned employees of the respondent Bank. They got registered the society for the purpose of cultural and economic welfare of its members. The settlement was arrived at between the Management of 58 Banks and their unions for introduction of pension scheme on October 29, 1993 and the pension scheme was effected from November 1, 1993. The Bank of Rajasthan Limited (Employees) Pension Regulation, 1993 came into force from November 1, 1993. Lateron the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. (Employees) Pension Rules, 1996 (for short '1996 Rules') came into force with retrospective effect from September 29, 1995. Acco...
Official Liquidator Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-16-2004
Reported in: [2005]127CompCas163(Raj)
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. The Maharashtra State Electricity Board filed this application under Section 456, read with Section 468 of the Companies Act and rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules read with Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC for setting aside the ex parte order dated 3-4-2002 in S.B. Company Application No. 12/1998.2. S.B. Company Application No. 12/98 has been decided on 3-4-2002 and the Maharashtra State Electricity Board is directed to make payment of Rs. 20,84,824 with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum from the due date within a period of one month to the Official Liquidator of M/s. Indo Engineering (Kota) Private Limited. The cost has also been ordered to be paid to the applicant as assessed by the Court.3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record of the application.4. From the documents Annexure A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-5, I am satisfied that Maharashtra State Electricity Board was not negligent in contesting the matter. It engaged the Advocat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »