Rajasthan Court October 2005 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.
Loomb Singh Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-21-2005
Reported in: II(2006)DMC783
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. This appeal under Section 374(2), Cr.P.C. has been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.2.2004 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat camp Jaitaran in Sessions Case No. 35/2003 State v. Loomb Singh, whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 304 Part I, I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs. 1,000, in default of payment thereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 18.5.1999 at 9.15 a.m., P.W. 1 Prem Singh submitted a written report at Police Station, Sendra, inter alia, stating therein that his elder sister Kamla was married with Loomb Singh 14-15 years ago and was having four living children and on 16.5.1999 in day at about 4 o'clock, Dharm Singh informed him that his brother-in-law after beating his sister on previous night had run away somewhere and as his sister was in an un...
New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Dhappu Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-21-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC581; 2006(1)WLC745
ORDERN.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the insurer, against the judgment and award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagaur dated 8.11.2001, passed in claim case No. 6/2000, decreeing the claim for a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 against the defendant Nos. 1, 3 and 4.2. The appeal was filed on 4.2.2002, it came up for admission on 4.4.2002, and was admitted, and on stay application, notices were ordered to be issued. When summons were sent, the summons of defendant No. 3 before the learned Trial Court, who was impleaded as a respondent No. 11 before this Court, were received unserved, with the report, that no such person exists at the address given in the summons, which was the address as given by the claimants in the learned Trial Court.3. Thereafter summons were sent again, but again the same were received unserved with the same report, while the other respondents have been served, and appearance have been put in on their behalf. In these circumstances, on 14.12.2004,...
Pappu Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1200; 2006(1)WLC613
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant faced trial in Sessions Case No. 56/1999 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Baran who vide Judgment dated December 2, 2000 convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months simple imprisonment.2. The allegations against the appellant in the written report submitted by informant Ram Swaroop Mali on June 9, 1999 at 10.00 PM with the Police Station Mangrol, were that at 9 PM on the said day he inflicted knife blows on the person of Om Prakash (now deceased) who was admitted to the hospital. A case under Sections 307 and 342 IPC was registered against the appellant by Police Station Mangrol and investigation commenced. On June 10, 1999 Om Prakash succumbed to his injuries and Section 302 IPC came to be added. Post mortem on the dead body was performed, statements of witnesses were recorded, the accused was arrested necess...
Sobhagya Devi and ors. Vs. Sukhvir Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC97
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. It is claimants' appeal for enhancement of compensation granted vide award dated 26th May, 2001 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kotputli (District Jaipur) ('Tribunal') in MACT Case No. 451/99.2. Claimants are parents and sisters of deceased Manish aged 12 years, and on 10th March, 1999 while he was going to give leave application of his father in Government School, Ramsinghpura and was moving to his side of footpath near Gopalpura Mod National Highway No. 8, was hit by a tanker No. GJ-6V-8156, being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, and as a result of accident, he died. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 1,10,000 with interest@ 9% p.a. from d the date of claim petition till actual payment.3. Mr. B.C. Rawat, Counsel for claimants urged that even where the deceased is considered to be non-earning member in the family, his notional income has been considered of Rs. 15,000 per annum and multiplier of 15 is adopted as per Schedule to the Motor V...
Bharat Bhushan Basotia Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj329; 2006(2)WLC83
K.S. Rathore, J.1. Since all the aforesaid writ petitions involve common question of law, therefore, these four writ petitions are being decided by this common judgment. The facts of the case of Bharat Bhushan Basotia v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. SBCWP No. 8152/2004 are being taken as a leading case.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 4.8.2003, the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short 'the RPSC') issued an advertisement for conducting the examination for 108 posts of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate under the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 1955 including the reserved category of SC/ST & OBC. The advertisement also contains that for the women candidates, there shall be horizontal reservation and in case of non-availability of women candidates, the seats are required to be filled by normal procedure.3. All the petitioners applied for the post of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate and appeared in the written examination. The RPSC declared the result on 25.6.2004. Thereafter, i...
Modern Syntex (India) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Rajasthan State Industrial Dev ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj78; 2006(1)WLC83
ORDERShiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. The petitioner in these writ petitions seeks to quash show cause notice-issued by the respondent-Corporation to the petitioner in regard to payment of enhanced compensation. Since identical questions of law and facts are involved in all these three matters. I proceed to decide them by a common order.2. For the convenience the facts of Writ Petition No. 5043/1991 are taken up. In the year 1976 vast chunks of land situated in villages near Delhi-Alwar Highway in Alwar District was handed over by the State Government to the Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred as 'Corporation'). On December 14, 1976 a communication was issued by the Corporation to the petitioner regarding allotment of undeveloped land at Alwar and on May 10, 1977 a lease deed was executed between the Corporation and the petitioner and land measuring 2,38,714 square meters situated in Matsya Industrial Area was handed over to the pe...
Babulal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1301; 2006(1)WLC137
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. In order to encourage industrialization, in 1974, the State of Rajasthan had acquired land in village Jhareda, District Alwar, for the benefit of Rajasthan Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limited (henceforth to be referred as 'RIICO' for short. According to the notification published on 13.9.74, the State had proposed to acquire appellant's 25 Bigha of land. On 25.12.74, the possession of the said land was handed over to RIICO. The appellant participated in the acquisition proceeding/before the Land Acquisition Officer (henceforth to be referred as 'LAO' for short. Vide award dated 19.5.1975, the LAO directed that by way of compensation Rs. 1,25,000/- should be paid to the appellant. 2. Since the appellant was aggrieved by the said award, he submitted an application before the LAO and prayed that the compensation for the land should be Rs. 5,000/- per Bigha instead of Rs. 2,500/- per Bigha as decided by the LAO. He further prayed that the compensati...
Net Ram Vs. Ramesh Chandra and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC194; 2006WLC(Raj)UC29
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. In middle of the night on 23.10.1987, when the appellant was riding his scooter, he met with an accident with a 'tempo'. His hand and his right knee were badly fractured. According to the disability certificate, the appellant had suffered 35% permanent disability. Consequently, he had filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur (henceforth referred to as 'The Tribunal') for compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,26,000. However, vide award dated 12.9.1994, the learned Tribunal was pleased to award a compensation of Rs. 45,000 only. Hence, this appeal before us for enhancement.2. Mr. K.N. Tewari, learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that instead of giving a specific compensation for different categories of non-pecuniary loss such as 'pain and agony', 'loss of future prospects', etc., the learned Tribunal has granted a lumpsum of Rs. 45,000. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has committed an error.3. On the other hand, Mr. ...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Rajendra Singh ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC181; 2007ACJ680; 2006WLC(Raj)UC57
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The appellant Corporation has challenged the award dated 1.5.2004 whereby learned Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (henceforth to be referred to as 'the Tribunal') awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,06,000 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum to the respondent-claimant for the injuries suffered by him in an accident involving a Roadways bus.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 11.2.2000 when Rajendra Singh, respondent, was returning from a marriage from Khairthal to Behrod in a jeep along with others, a Roadways bus, bearing No. RJ 02-P 0927, rashly and negligently hit the jeep. Resultantly, respondent-claimant suffered fractures of right leg and right hand. He also sustained an injury on his nose. Since his condition was rather serious, he was immediately referred from Behrod Hospital to the S.M.S. Hospital in Jaipur. Twice, he had to undergo operation. During the course of operation, rods had to be inserted in both his fractured leg and han...
Dr. Ram Chandra Goyal Vs. Mool Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC726; 2006WLC(Raj)UC7
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. On 26.5.1988 while returning back home on his scooter, the appellant, Dr. Ram Chandra Goyal was hit by a Truck. Consequently, he suffered multiple fractures specially of the knee and of the left leg. Resultantly, he suffered a disability to the extent of 14 per cent. The appellant filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, wherein he claimed a condensation to the tune of Rs 1,62.0002. In order to substantiate his case, the appellant examined himself, along with three other witnesses. However, the respondent No. 3, the New India Assurance Company, did not examine any witness in its defence. The learned Tribunal formulated six issues. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, vide award dated 12.9.1994 the learned Tribunal awarded a compensation merely of Rs. 25,000 TO the claimant. Since the claimant is aggrieved by the said award, therefore, he has filed the present appeal before us.3. Mr. K.N. Tiwari, learned Counsel for t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »