Rajasthan Court March 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.
Sajjan Kanwar (Smt.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1179; 2005(3)WLC152
V.K. Bali, J.1. Smt. Sajjan Kanwar wife of late Jamadar Banne Singh, the petitioner herein in the present writ petition filed by her, seeks a writ in the nature of certitorari so as to quash Order dated 13.9.2002 (Annex.5) and in consequence of setting aside the said Order to grant to her mustering out/family pension as applicable with all consequential benefits including interest on the arrears @ 18% for depriving her legitimate dues for long years for no fault of her.2. The facts on which the relief as mentioned above is sought to rest reveal that the late husband of the petitioner was initially enrolled in the Indian Army on 13.3.1931 and was discharged from service after putting 7 years, 9 months and 27 days of service. Husband of the petitioner was was re-enrolled in the Army in 27th Bn. of the Rajputana Rif. on 27.9.1939 and was granted viceroy commission on 1.10.1942. He was discharged of his second engagement on 21.2.1946 after serving the Army for 6 years, 4 months and 25 days...
Brothers Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Rajasthan Financial Corpora ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: III(2005)BC580; RLW2005(3)Raj1554; 2005(2)WLC782
K.S. Rathore, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking writ, order or direction directing the respondent RFC to obey the direction of the Settlement Committee and thereby accept a sum of Rs. 50,97,830.00 with simultaneous release of all mortgaged document lying with the Rajasthan Financial Corporation. It is further prayed that the aforesaid amount should be accepted as full and final payment of all dues of the respondents in view of the settlement of the matter by the Settlement Committee.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner company is manufacturing drugs and supplying drugs to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.3. The petitioner companies have applied for loan from the RFC and total loan amount to the tune of Rs. 37.10 lacs was disbursed from time to time and documents were executed on 17.12.86 for loan of Rs. 13.50 lacs, on 7.10.87 for loan of Rs. 13 lacs and on 27.1.88 for loan of Rs. 3.60 lacs.4. O...
Omi Lal Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(3)Raj2156; 2005(3)WLC287
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents to give effect to the award passed in favour of the petitioner on 25.10.1997 specifying the nature of reliefs. The respondents inspite of this award have failed to give effect to the award passed in favour of the petitioner although their application for setting aside the ex-parte award has been rejected up to the Division Bench.2. The counsel for the respondents Mr. Sharma overlooking the fact regarding dismissal of the writ petition and appeal against the impugned award before the Single Bench as also up to the Division Bench respectively, has sought to assail the award on its merit, but it hardly needs to be emphasized that if the award-although ex-parte in nature, has not been set aside, up to the Division Bench of the High Court, the same cannot be permitted to be challenged on merit at the instance of the respondents when the beneficiary moves the court for its implement...
Kesha Ram and anr. Vs. Saroj and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC130; 2005(3)WLC625
N.P. Gupta, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties present.2. By the impugned order, the learned Trial Court (MACT) has directed that out of awarded amount, a sum of Rs. 85,000/- be given to the widow of the deceased Smt. Saroj.3. The peculiar facts and circumstances of the case are, that for the death of one Khet Singh, who died on 4.3.2000, a claim petition was filed by the parents on 29.7.2000, being Claim Case No. 59/2000 without disclosing the factum of deceased having left any widow, and in that claim, on 13.3.2002, a compromise was arrived at through Lok Adalat, and accordingly an award of Rs. 1,00,000/- was passed. What is significant to note is, that, in that compromise award, it was specifically stipulated, that if it is found that deceased has left the widow, and if she files any, claim, then it will be the responsibility of the present claimants (parents), to satisfy her claim. It is on 29.4.2002 itself, that widow Smt. Saroj filed an application, copy whereof has been ...
ibrahim Khan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1188; 2005(2)WLC344
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellants, nine in number, were the accused on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jaipur District Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 108/1996. The learned trial Judge vide judgment dated July 31,1999 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:-Ibrahim Khan: Under Section 148 IPC:To suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for six months. Under Section 326/149 IPC: To suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. Under Section 302 IPC: To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Ayub Khan:Under Section 302/149 IPC: To suffer Imprisonment for the life and fine Rs. 200/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.Under Section 326 IPC: To suffer Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. Under Sec...
Shaffi Mohammed and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2112; RLW2005(2)Raj963; 2005(2)WLC297
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. These three bail applications are under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail during the pendency of the trial in respect of offence Under Section 8/20, 8/20 and 8/18 respectively of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'the Act' hereinafter) respectively.2. In Bail Application No. 1182/05 Shaffi Mohammed v. State, a FIR No. 715/04 was registered Under Section 8/20 of the Act at Police Station Kotwali, Baran as 4 kg. 450 gms. Ganja was recovered from the possession of the accused petitioner on 21.11.2004. In Bail Application No. 1195/05 Mohan Singh v. State, FIR No. 402/04 was registered at Police Station, Sevar (Bharatpur) Under Section 8/20 of the Act as 300 grams Charas was recovered from the possession of the accused petitioner on 21.11.2004. Similarly, 1 kg. Opium with bag was recovered from accused Sita Ram on 20.12.2004, therefore, FIR No. 185/04 was registered against him for the offence Under Section 8/18 of the Act at Po...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Godu Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1374
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the judgment dated 10.4.1997 of the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 621/1995.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record of the case.S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 621/1995 was Filed by the claimant respondents against the award dated 31.03.1995 of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal') in MACT Case No. 665/1992; the learned Tribunal under the award aforesaid awarded a sum of Rs. 96,000/- as compensation to the claimant respondents on various counts.3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that deceased Mangal was travelling in a Jeep alongwith some of his friends and relations from Jaipur to Dausa. On arrival of the Jeep near Kanota, suddenly a bus bearing No. RNE 8307 driven by respondent No. 5 Devi Charan (the bus driver), rashly and negligently, came from opposite side ...
Mool Chand and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1183; 2005(3)WLC164
F.C. Bansal, J.1. The instant appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 24.3.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Neem-Ka-Thana, District Sikar whereby accused appellants Mool Chand, Phool Chand, Munga Ram, Narayan and Shrawan Kumar have been convicted for the offences under Sections 304 Part-1/149 and 148 IPC and sentenced to suffer S.I. for seven years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default to further suffer S.I. for ten months and to suffer S.I for one year and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to further suffer S.I. for one month each respectively.2. Both the substantive sentences were Ordered to run concurrently.3. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 29.06.99 at about 11.00 p.m. accused appellants Mungaram, Moolchand, Narayan, Phoolchand and Shrawan assaulted Kailash S/o Geegaram, by caste Saini, R/o-Dhani Bhatali, Village Chokdi and caused injuries on his person resulting in his death instantaneously. The incident is alleged to have taken place in ...
Bholaki (Smt.) Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1331
Prakash Tatia, J.1. In all these writ petitions, common point is involved and therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment and for convenient disposal of these writ petitions, facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6999/2003 are taken.2. The facts in nut-shell are that the petitioner applied for grant of permit to ply his vehicle on public road for which petitioner submitted an application under Rule 5.5 of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rule, 1990. The permit was granted to the petitioner treating the route in question as falling in the category 'A' as described in the explanation (1) appended to Sub-rule (3) of Rule 5.5 of the Rules of 1990. The petitioner was granted permit in the various years, much before the year 2002. According to petitioner, the petitioner came to know that the route in question was falling in the category 'C', when he noticed the order of the State Government dated 2nd May, 2002 (Annex.1). When petitioner came to know about the above order of the...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Goru Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC377
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the judgment dated 10.4.1997 of the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 621 /1995.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record of the case.3. S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 621/1995 was filed by the claimant respondents against the award dated 31.3.1995 of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal') in MACT Case No. 665/1992; the learned Tribunal under the award aforesaid awarded a sum of Rs. 96,000/- as compensation to the claimant respondents on various counts.4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that deceased Mangal was travelling in a jeep along with some of his friends and relations from Jaipur to Dausa. On arrival of the jeep near Kanota, suddenly a bus bearing No. RNE 8307 driven by respondent No. 5 Devi Charan (the bus driver) rashly and negligently, came from opposite si...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »