Rajasthan Court June 2005 Judgments
Steel Authority of India Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-03-2005
Reported in: III(2005)ACC853; 2006ACJ2660
J.R. Goyal, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the award dated 20.3.91 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in Case No. OA-I-38 of 1990. 2. On account of short delivery of the consignment of 19,710 MT of steel rounds booked on 28.4.1987 from D.S.P. Durgapur to MIC Siding, Jaipur, claim petition has been filed by appellant Steel Authority of India in Railway Claims Tribunal, Bench at Jaipur wherein an award of Rs. 3,383 including Rs. 2,279 cost of the application, Rs. 30 as process fee and Rs. 1,074 as advocate's fee, was passed.3. Learned Counsel for appellant only raised the point of interest and contended that due to lapses on the part of the railway authorities, the appellant deprived of from the utilization of the money which was blocked because of the loss of consigned goods. He also contended that the provisions of Civil Procedure Code are applicable and thus by virtue of the provisions of Section 34 of Civil Procedure Code, the appellant is entitl...
Tag this Judgment!Thandi Ram and ors. Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-03-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2843
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellants, three in number, along with Mukesh, (herein after to be referred as 'accused') have impugned the judgment dated July 18, 2001 of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindaun in Sessions Case No. 123/2001 (44/97), whereby the accused have been convicted and sentenced as under:(1) Thandi Ram and (2) Ghamandi:Under Section 302/34 IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonment.Under Section 323 IPC:Each to suffer simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer fifteen days simple imprisonment.(3) Madan:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonment.Under Section 3/25 Arms Act:To suffer simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment.Sentences were directed to run concur...
Tag this Judgment!Banshidhar Garg Vs. ShamshuddIn and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-03-2005
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC211
J.R. Goyal, J.1. Instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant-claimant for the enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred as 'Tribunal'), Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 1.12.1992 in M.A.C. No. 423/1988.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 14.4.1988 at about 9.30 a.m. the claimant Banshidhar was going from the main gate of Ramniwas Park by his scooter bearing registration No. DHU-8033 to attend the office, a mini bus, driven by respondent No. 1 Shamshuddin, owned and insured with respondent No. 2 Sh. Ambrish and United Insurance Co. Ltd. respectively, came from behind with high speed and hit the scooter driven by Banshidar, as a result of which the claimant sustained injuries.3. Learned Tribunal after concluding the trial awarded compensation of Rs. 21,413/- with the stipulation to make the payment within a period of three months with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing the claim application i.e., 16.6.1988, ...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Charan and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-02-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3426; RLW2005(4)Raj2404; 2005(4)WLC325
V.K. Bali, J.1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of two connected Criminal Appeals bearing No. 315/2001 filed by Shiv Charan, Rati Ram, Asha Ram Dharam Singh and Mahaveer Singh as also Criminal Appeal No. 629/2001 filed by Rati Ram through Jail, as the same emanate from a common impugned order of conviction and sentence dated 7-5-2001 recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 2 Sikar. All the five appellants who faced trial under various sections have since been held guilty for an offence under Section 395/149, IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years as also to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Under Section 396/149, IPC to undergo life imprisonment as also to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. They have also been held guilty for an offence under Section 148, IPC to ...
Tag this Judgment!Gammon India Ltd. Vs. Project Director, Ruidp and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-02-2005
Reported in: II(2007)BC305; 2006(1)CTLJ423(Raj); RLW2005(4)Raj2417
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. The petitioner-Gammon India Ltd. in SBCWP No. 3687/2005 and the petitioner-Subhash Project Marketing Ltd. in SBCWP No. 3574/2005 have challenged the letter of the Respondent-Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project (for short 'RUIDP') dated 9th May, 2005 as contained in Annexure-P/1 by which the petitioners have been excluded from the list of selected applicants for participating in the pre- qualification bids in pursuance of a notification dated 31.5.2003 which was issued on 6.6.2003 for awarding contract of Jaipur Bisalpur Water Supply Project. They have further challenged the reasons assigned by the RUIDP indicating it to the applicants as to why their application for participating in the bidding process has been rejected. Consequently, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the letter No. F3(59)/PQ-Cont/BSL/160 dated 9.5.2005 and to further quash the reasons stated in Schedule A to the reply to the Civil Writ P...
Tag this Judgment!Managing Committee, Rao Tularam Rashtrya Unnati Vidyalaya No. 2 Vs. Je ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-02-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2566; 2005(3)WLC456
R.P. Vyas, J.1. A common question is involved in all the aforesaid three writ petitions, therefore, the above-mentioned petitions are decided by this order.2. By the aforesaid petitions, the petitioners-Management Committee seeks to quash and set aside the judgment dated 20.11.2004 (Annexure 5) delivered by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred as 'the Tribunal')3. Brief facts giving rise to the instant petitions are that it has been averred in the appeal before the Tribunal that Shri Udai Krishna Yadav, Shri Jetha Ram and Shri Ram Gopal Yadav were appointed by the petitioner-Institution on the posts of L.D.C., Class IV, and Teacher Grade III, respectively. Their services were terminated by the Petitioner-Institution by order dated 16.5.2002.4. Against the impugned order of termination, they preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.5. The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal by a common judgment dated 20.11.2004 (Annexure 5) and the o...
Tag this Judgment!Prof. M.S. Chaturvedi Vs. University of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-02-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2769; 2005(4)WLC258
V.K. Bali, J.1. This D.B. Special Appeal W under Article 225 of the Constitution of India read with Section 18, Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 has been filed against interim order dated 26.5.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9089/2002. The impugned order reads as under:'After having considered entire material on record, in view of controversies and issues raised on behalf of both the sides and further the final relief, as prayed in the writ petition should not be granted by an interim order, in the facts and circumstances, 1 find no justification for continuing the interim orders passed in favour of the petitioner earlier. The same is hereby vacated.The stay application stands dismissed of accordingly.'2. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has apprised us that when the matter came up for hearing before the learned Single Judge on 27.11.2003, interim stay was granted to the appellant after hearing all the concerned parties. Learned Si...
Tag this Judgment!Shriram Fertilizers and Chemicals Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-02-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)BC287
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and perused the entire record of the appeal.2. The plaintiff-appellant filed a Civil Suit in the Court of Additional District Judge No. 3, Kota, against the defendant-respondent for recovery of Rs. 4,75,527.50p. and compensation for the delivery of damaged 15699 bags of Urea and for interest as well as cost. Later on, on constitution of Railway Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal') the suit came to be transferred to the Tribunal.3. The learned Tribunal decided the matter on 7.1.1992. The learned Tribunal accepted the claim of the plaintiff appellant for Rs. 4,47,825.00 p. It has awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the amount of Rs. 4,18,446.00 p. from the date of the order. Challenge has been made to the part of the order of the learned Tribunal awarding interest from the date of the order.4. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant submitted that the interest is to ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-02-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ173; 2005WLC(Raj)UC706
B. Prasad, J.1. The present appeal is filed by eight appellants namely Rajendra alias Raju Anil Kumar, Chander Pal, Sahi Ram Suresh Kumar, Rajesh, Smt. Kamlesh and Smt. Vidhya being aggrieved by the decision of the Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Rajgarh in Sessions Case No. 27/96 dated 17-5-2001. By the impugned judgment the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as under : ------------------------------------------------------------------------------OFFENCE UNDER SECTION ACCUSED PERSONS SENTENCE FINE IN DEFAULT OF FINE------------------------------------------------------------------------------148 IPC All the accused 1 Year's - - persons R.I.302/149 IPC 'Life 5000/- Six Months R.I. Imprisonment 307, 307/149 IPC '5 Years R.I. 2000/- 2 Months R.I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------2. The prosecution was initiated on the basis of FIR which was lodged by injured Gopal Ram at Police Station, Hamirvas. On...
Tag this Judgment!Sharda Pareek (Smt.) Vs. Board of Secondary Education and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jun-02-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj77; 2005(3)WLC669
V.K. Bali, J.1. Smt. Sharda Pareek, Assistant Secretary/Assistant Director through present petition filed by her under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to order dated 15.1.2005 by which she has been treated to have retired with effect from 20.1.2005. She seeks quashing of the order aforesaid and as a consequence thereof; to be treated in continuous service with all consequential benefits.Brief facts on which the reliefs, as spelled out above, are sought to rest, reveal that petitioner was initially appointed in the Board of Secondary Education as Lecturer - School Teacher by direct recruitment. She was promoted on the post of Assistant Secretary in 1994. Seniority list (Anx.1) of Assistant Secretary/Assistant Director was issued on 7.4.1998. It is the case of petitioner that one P.C. Mahawar, who was much junior to her, was given regular appointment on the post of Assistant Secretary. Once again on 20.10.2004, persons junior to her were given promotion on the po...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »