Rajasthan Court November 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.
Bhola Nath Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj774
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellants' prayer seeking directions to the respondent Company not to act upon his offer of voluntary retirement was declined by the learned Single Judge on the ground that the writ petition was not maintainable since the respondent was purely a Private Ltd. Company. Challenging the order of learned Single Judge the appellant has filed the instant appeal.2. During the pendency of appeal the appellant has filed an application for taking additional document on record. The respondent Company submitted reply to the application.3. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. In order to show that the respondent Company is the instrumentality of the State and amenable under Article 12 of the Constitution, the appellant has placed on record the question raised in Rajya Sabha about the respondent Company on August 19, 1985. We deem it appropriate to refer the document Annexure 19 filed by the appellant along with the application. The document reads thus:RAJYA S...
Municipal Council Vs. Judge, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj833
Ashok Parihar, J.1. A dispute in regard to regularisation of services of the respondent No. 3, the concerned workman was raised and the same was referred accordingly by the State Government to the Labour Court, Jaipur, After considering evidence and material on record, the Labour Court vide award dated 18.11.1988 observed that in absence of any regular post, the regular pay scale cannot be granted to the concerned workman, however, as and when any regular post is made available, the services of the concerned workman may be regularized and he may be given regular pay scale from the same date of regularisation.2. After passing of the award, it appears that the petitioner filed writ petition before this Court claiming regular pay scale on the post in question on the principle of equal pay for equal work. However, in view of the observations made by the Labour Court in the award, referred above, though this Court did not issue any directions, however, the writ petition was dismissed as wit...
Divisional Forest Officer Vs. Ram Kalyan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: [2006(110)FLR74]; RLW2006(1)Raj777; 2006(2)WLC61
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Heard.It appears that the exparte award was passed by the learned Labour Court, Kota on May 31, 1995 and it was published in the gazette on September 11, 1995 and it became enforceable under Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on October 11, 1995 after the expiry of 30 days from the date of its publication. As application for setting aside the award was filed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Jhalawar on February 29, 1996 i.e. after 5-1/2 months from the date of publication of the award. Learned Labour Court, Kota vide order dated March 12, 2001 dismissed the application on the ground that the court became functus-officio and could not call in question the award in any manner. Against the said order of the Labour Court, the Divisional Forest Officer, Kota filed writ petition before the learned Single Judge which was dismissed on July 25, 2001. the aforequoted orders have been assailed by the Divisional forest Officer in the instant special appeal.2....
Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj87; RLW2006(2)Raj1206; 2006(1)WLC755
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J. 1. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are that the petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged inter alia in the business of mining of zinc and lead. The material excavated from the mines by the petitioner is processed in Beneficiation Plants situated within the leased area taken on lease by the petitioner-company from the State. Beneficiation is a process under which the ore excavated is treated so as to increase the percentage of one or other metals, in the instant case, zinc and lead. In this process, zinc and lead are removed from ore leaving behind waste which is termed as tailings or rejects. The tailings and rejects are dumped by the petitioner in a tailing dam situated within the leased area itself. According to the petitioner zinc and lead that are found in the form of zinc and lead sulphite in the run-of-mine ore do not change their chemical composition at the end of the beneficiation. The materia...
Machhendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1740; 2006(2)WLC334
ORDERR.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 30-9-2005 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Alwar whereby he has framed charges for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 323, 365, 342, 307 and 325/149, IPC.2. Shri Badhwar, learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that all the injuries on Prashant Yadav, the injured, are on non-vital parts and out of five injuries, two are lacerated wounds. Both the lacerted wounds are on the left leg and there are three abrassions on the left leg. According to the x-ray report of Prashant Yadav there is fracture of a finger and the fractures on left forearm and fracture on the left leg and right leg. Thus, according to him, these injuries are not 'sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death of the person.' Hence, offence under Section 307, IPC is not made out against the petitioner.3. On the other hand, the learned P.P. has relied on the case of Khajan Singh v. State of M.P. 1996 Cri LJ 37...
Abdul Gani Vs. Abdul Gafoor
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj145; RLW2006(1)Raj323; 2006(1)WLC186
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The point of importance that arises in the instant appeals concerns the interpretation of 'clog on the equity of redemption'. The phrase 'clog on the enquiry of redemption' is nowhere used in the Transfer of Property Act for short, 'TP Act'. The doctrine is implicit in the language of Section 60 of TP Act, which deals with the mortgagor's right to redeem. The first proviso to Section 60 TP Act contemplates the extinguishment of the right of redemption by the act of the parties or by a decree of the Court.2. The facts giving rise to these appeals are as under:Abdul Gani, the plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell against Abdul Gafoor, the defendant, with the averments that on February 17, 1971 the defendant obtained loan in the sum of Rs. 2500/- from the plaintiff by mortgaging his house situated at Ghat Darwaja Jaipur and executed a mortgage deed on February 17, 1971. On September 8, 1971 the defendant required more money therefore ...
Shankar Lal and anr. Vs. Nand Lal Meena and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-19-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC589; RLW2006(1)Raj341; 2006(1)WLC182
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The claimant-appellants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Neem-ka-Thana, Sikar in MAC No. 43/89, whereby the learned Tribunal allowed the compensation of Rs. 80,000/- in favour of the appellants and deducted 40 out of which towards negligence on the part of the deceased, therefore, total compensation of Rs. 48,000/- was allowed.3. The appellants are parents of the d Upendra Kumar who was admittedly travelling in a bus by sitting on the roof top of it. The appellants filed an application for compensation in respect of death of Upendra Kumar who died while travelling on the top roof of the bus.4. The non-claimants No. 1 and 2 owner and driver filed their written reply wherein contents of the application were denied. The Insurance Company filed a separate reply to the claim petition and denied he contents of the application and sub...
Rajasthan Poly Pack Laminators (P) Ltd. Vs. Rajasthan State Financial ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj86; III(2006)BC350; RLW2006(1)Raj792; 2006(1)WLC719
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5164/98, which had been filed by the appellant/petitioner M/s. Rajasthan Poly Pack Laminators (P) Ltd., for a direction to the respondent Rajasthan State Financial Corporation (R.F.C. for short to grant him the benefit of a scheme floated by the RFC known as 'Onetime Settlement Scheme' which was meant for settling the manner in which the debtor could pay-off his debt in a convenient manner and in easy instalments.2. The petitioner-appellant came up with a case that the respondent RFC had been floating several schemes by way of 'Onetime Settlement Scheme' for settling the amount of loan which is disbursed to the companies or individuals and if the entire amount was not realised as per the agreement between the parties, the same could be settled by way of 'Onetime Settlement'. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition essential...
Mohan Lal Vs. Assistant Engineer Rajasthan Agriculture Marketing Board ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-19-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj779; 2006(2)WLC76
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant workman has impugned the order dated August 23, 2001 of learned Single Judge whereby the award of learned Labour Court Kola dated February 3, 1999 was set aside to the extent it ordered for reinstatement of workman and instead of reinstatement compensation in the sum of Rs. 5000/- was awarded to the workman.2. Having heard the submissions and on scanning the material on record, we notice mat learned Single Judge considered the delay of six years in raising the industrial dispute fatal and came to the conclusion that because of laches on the part of workman, he was only entitled to compensation.3. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the workman that despite the fact that plea regarding delay was not raised by the respondent employer, learned Single Judge considered it. Had this plea been raised, the workman would have been in a position to show the circumstances preventing him in approaching the court at an earlier stage. It is further urged ...
Narendra Sharma and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-19-2005
Reported in: I(2006)DMC756; 2006(2)WLC291
ORDERR.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 13.6.2005 passed by Special Judge (Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases), Jaipur, whereby he has rejected an application filed by the petitioners under Section 311, Cr. P.C. for summoning two Investigating Officers as Court witnesses. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a Mriag FIR was registered and an inquiry was started. Iniritally, during the course of inquiry, the complainant did not level any substantial allegations against the accused petitioners. However, two days later, Sohan Lal, the brother of the deceased submitted a report in the Police Station wherien he alleged the offences under Sections 498A, 306 and 304-B, IPC against the petitioner. Four different Investigation Officers (henceforth to be referred to as the I.O., for short) of the rank of Addl. SP/Deputy S.P., carried out the investigation. Subsequently, the police submitted a charge sheet for offences under Sections 498A and 306, IPC. But, subseq...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »