Rajasthan Court September 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.
Mohan Devi @ Mohini Devi (Smt.) Vs. Lrs of Himmat Lal Menaria
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj270; 2005(1)WLC228
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. In these two appeals, the two orders, namely order dated 13th Sept., 2001 and 5th August, 2003 are under challenge. The plaintiff is seeking setting aside the abatement of his suit by moving applications and the court below refused to set aside the abatement of the suit and also refused to take on record the legal representatives of the deceased sole dependent. It will be necessary to narrate few facts before proceedings further.3. The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of contract against the sole defendant. In that suit, the defendant submitted an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on 4.12.1995. The said application was dismissed by the Trial Court vide order dated 6.2.97. The defendant preferred revision petition, which was registered as S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 503/1997. This court while issuing notice on 28th May, 1997 stayed the further proceedings in the suit. On 23rd June, 1998, the sole defe...
Munnir Mohammad Vs. Noor Mohammad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj48; RLW2005(2)Raj953; 2005(1)WLC285
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This is the second appeal under Section 100, C.P.C. filed by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 17-4-1999 whereby learned Additional District Judge No. 4, Jaipur City, Jaipur affirmed the judgment and decreed dated 18-3-1993 passed by the learned Additional Munsif (East), Jaipur City, Jaipur.2. Briefly narrated the facts are that the plaintiffs-respondents (hereinafter to the referred as the plaintiffs) filed a civil suit on 29-4-1974 for declaration and possession of some portion of the house No. 926 situated in Rasta Khandar, Gall Tripolia Wall, Chowkri Gangapofe, Jaipur with the averments that the plaintiffs are the owners of the house which has been marked 'Ka' in the map annexed to the plaint. It was further averred that there is a Medi (room) along with open space which has been marked 'Kha' over the property marked 'K. The defendant who belongs to the family of the plaintiffs is residing In the portion marked 'Kha' with the permission of Abdul L...
Bundu Khan and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj858; 2004(4)WLC574
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellants were accused on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District Jaipur bearing Sessions Case No. 89/97. Learned Sessions Judge vide judgment dated May 24, 2001 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:-Bundu Khan:Under Section 302 IPC: To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2.000/-, in default to further suffer Simple Imprisonment for two months. Jarina:Under Section 302/34 IPC: To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to further suffer Simple Imprisonment for two months. 2. The prosecution story is woven like this:-On May 24, 1997 around 6.15 PM Nawal Kishore Sharma (PW.7), who was posted as ASI at Police Station Bagru, recorded parcha bayan of Smt. Kamla (PW. 1) at Mridul Agricultural Farm Bindayka. In the parcha bayan Smt. Kamla stated that her husband Mahadev (now deceased) was axed by Bundu Khan while his wife Jarina inflicted lathi-blows. Mangej (PW.8) and Jagdish Bagra (PW.18) had seen the inci...
Pile Foundation Construction Co. Vs. Rajasthan State Bridge Constructi ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(3)Raj2121; 2005(3)WLC230
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. This is a application for appointment of an arbitrator on account of a dispute which has arisen between the respondent Rajasthan State Bridge Construction Corporation Ltd. and the appellant/-M/s Pile Foundation Construction Company in regard to claim of payment on account of the contractual obligation discharged by the applicant by constructing Railway Over Bridge at Jhotwara, Admittedly, there is a clause for arbitration signed by both the parties which indicates that in the even of a dispute arising between the parties, the same will be referred to the arbitrator for adjudication and there is a specific Clause in the arbitration agreement itself that before an arbitrator is appointed, the application for appointment of an arbitrator will have to be supplemented by the non-refundable fee for the application, the applicant although submitted an application for appointment of an arbitrator and for referring the dispute to him, failed to deposit the prescribed fee ...
Ami Chand Sharma Vs. Sushil Kumar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj191; 2005(1)WLC64
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the appellant-defendant against the judgment and decree dated 23.2.1999 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar in Civil Appeal No. 35/1996 by which he allowed the appeal of the plaintiff-respondent and set aside the judgment and decree dated 4.7.1996 pissed by the learned Addl. Civil Judge (JD) No. 2, Sri Ganganagar dismissing the suit of the plaintiff-respondent and after deciding issues No. 5, 6 and 7 in favour of the plaintiff-respondent, he decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent against the defendant-appellant for eviction from the shop in question on the ground of reasonable and bonafide necessity as contained in Section 13(1)(h) of Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1950').2. The necessary facts giving rise to this second appeal are as follows:-On 16.7.1985, the plain tiff-respondent filed a suit against the defendant-app...
Girish Pal Singh and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ279; RLW2005(1)Raj340; 2004(4)WLC692
ORDERN.N. Mathur, J.In this group of Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C, petitioners have sought direction to quash different F.I.Rs. lodged at Anti Corruption Bureau Choki Sirohi, Police Station Pradhan Aarakshi Kendra, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur under Section 13(1)(D)(ii) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120B, IPC.1. S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1015/2003:In the instant case, petitioners Girish Pal Singh and others have challenged the F.I.R. No. 189/1999 lodged at Anti Corruption Bureau Choki Sirohi, Police Station Pradhan Aarakshi Kendra, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur, by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Sirohi. It is alleged that the Gram Panchayat, Aakra Bhatta convened a meeting under the chairmanship of Smt. Saka Devi, Sarpanch on 25-1-1996 and adopted a resolution to sell the land in favour of the petitioners herein viz; Girish Pal Singh, Hodel Singh and Smt. Pushpa and two others viz., Lata ...
Ratan Singh Rajpurohit Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj216; 2005(1)WLC171
B. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner was recruited through Rajasthan Public Service Commission on the post of Sub-Inspector Police. The examinations were held for recruiting Sub Inspectors of Police for Rajasthan Police where selected candidates were to be assigned to any of the section according to merit i.e. (a) Armed Police (b) Rajasthan Armed Constabulary & (c) Mewar Bhil Corps. Petitioner's selection was communicated to him vide order dated 17.03.99 as Sub-Inspector of Police (Armed Police) and he was sent for training.2. Subsequently, it was discovered that petitioner was not entitled to be assigned as per order dated 17.03.99. Another order dated 10.05.2000 was passed wherein, he was assigned to Mewar Bhil Corps instead of Armed Police because that was his entitlement In terms of the merit placement. When this change was effected, petitioner approached this Court. An order was passed whereby, this Court directed that petitioner should make a representation before the Director General ...
Nirmala Rani Sanand (Smt.) Vs. Lalchand @ L.C. Soni
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj230; 2005(1)WLC282
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The plaintiff's suit for eviction from the suit premises filed against the tenant-appellant was decreed by the Trial Court's judgment and decree dated 6th Dec, 1995 on the ground of default in payment of rent. It will be worthwhile to mention here that plaintiff was given opportunity to deposit the arrears of rent by determining the rent under Section 13(4) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 but he did not deposit the rent before the Trial Court. Therefore, his defence against the eviction was struck off by the order of the court dated 16.2.1995. The Trial Court also held that defendant committed material alteration in the premises in dispute. Further, the Trial Court also held that defendant parted with the possession of the property and decreed the suit on the basis of the above grounds.3. The defendant-tenant preferred appeal against the Trial Court's decree dated 6th Dec, 1995, which was di...
Ganpat Singh Vs. Chand Mal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-06-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj890; 2004(4)WLC659
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant Ganpat Singh against the judgment and decree of Additional District Judge No. 3, Ajmer dated 26.7.2003 passing a decree for. specific performance of an agreement to sell the suit house in plaintiffs favour.2. The plaintiffs (father and son) filed a civil suit for specific performance on 8.12.2000 with the averments that the defendant entered into an agreement with the plaintiffs to sell western portion of the house AMC No. 338/5 situated at Lakhan Kotari, Ajmer for a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/-. In pursuance of the said agreement the defendant received Rs. 3,50,000/- from the plaintiffs as part payment of the sale price and executed an agreement (Ex.1) on 13.12.1998. It was agreed upon between the parties that the balance of the sale price shall be paid at the time of the registration of the sale deed. The plaintiffs were always ready and willing to perform their part of the contract but the defendant continued to extend the time of executi...
Vijay BenjamIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-06-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj883; 2005(1)WLC538
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant was placed on trial before the learned Special Judge (Sati Nivaran) and Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 3/1998 for having committed murder of Stifan Loyal. Learned Judge vide judgment dated August 10, 1999 convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months.2. As per prosecution story the informant Stenli Moris (PW.10) submitted a written report to Rajendra Singh, SHO Police Station Vidhayak Puri, Jaipur City on October 27, 1997 at SMS Hospital, Jaipur with the averments that on the said date at 7.30 PM while his wife Usha Lal was coming to her house the appellant hurled abuses. On being informed by Usha Lal, the informant went to the house of appellant and demanded explanation for his unruly conduct. The appellant became angry and had scuffle with the informant. In th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »