Rajasthan Court July 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.
Ram Prasad Parewa Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj67; 2005(4)WLC518
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is as under:-to quash and set aside the impugned transfer order dated July 15, 2005 (Ann.7). In the alternative, it may be declared that if the Government is given any administrative control on day to day affairs of municipalities and that too by virtue of any provision then such provision should be ordered to be ceased to exist in view of the amended provisions of the Constitution i.e., by virtue of 73rd Amendment of 1992.2. As per the facts averred in the writ petition the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Lower Division Clerk vide order dated January 13, 1977. The appointment was made under the Rajasthan Municipal (Ministerial) Service Rules, 1963 (for short 'Rules 1963'). The petitioner was transferred to Badi Sadri vide transfer order dated July 9, 2004. The petitioner was relieved to join at Badi Sadri, but he was not allowed to join the duty on the ground that he was working on the ...
Lalit Kumar Dubey and anr. Vs. Salim Mohammed and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC423; RLW2005(4)Raj2555; 2005(4)WLC225
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. This appeal has been filed on behalf of claimant-appellants against the judgment/award dated 9.6.93 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur in MACT Case No. 891/91.2. The only contention urged on behalf of appellants is that the tribunal has committed serious error in deducting a sum of Rs. 60,780/- i.e., 20% of total amount of compensation on account of lump-sum payment. He submits that there cannot be any deduction out of total amount of award on account of lump-sum amount. He has referred 1992 ACJ 300 (Hardeo Kaur and Ors. v. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and Anr.) in this regard.3. Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that learned tribunal is justified in deducting the amount of Rs. 60,780/- on account of lump-sum amount as there were number of judgments at the relevant time. However, no other contrary judgment of the Supreme Court or larger bench has been cited.4. I have considered the rival submissions and exa...
Durjan Singh and anr. Vs. Surja Ram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC229; RLW2005(4)Raj2721; 2005(4)WLC675
N.K. Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment/award dated 8.9.1992 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Neem-ka-thana in Motor Accident Claims Case No. 21/1988, whereby the learned tribunal awarded a total amount of compensation as Rs. 2,74,800/- but held that the insurance company will be liable to make the payment upto Rs. 25,000/- and rest of amount will be recovered from the owner and driver of the vehicle, in question.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that initial liability to make entire payment of compensation lies on the insurance company, even if liability of the insurance company is limited and after payment of the entire amount of compensation, the insurance company is entitled to recover the excess amount on its liability amount from the owner of the vehicle.3. His next contention is that even as per insurance policy, the liability of the insurance company was upto Rs. 50,000/- whereas the learned tribunal divided the said liability ...
Prem Narayan Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2916; 2005(4)WLC684
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The defects pointed out by Registry are over ruled.2. The petitioner in this writ petition impugns the order of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (for short 'RCSAT') whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground that there was no impugned written order against the petitioner. Core question therefore emerges for consideration is as to whether appeal before the RCSAT is maintainable without the impugned written order3. A radical charge was made in the Constitutional law relating to the services by the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act, 1976, which inserted into the Constitution Article 323A to take out the adjudication of disputes relating to the recruitment and conditions of service of the public services of the Union and of the State from the hands of the civil courts and the High Courts and to place it before an Administrative Tribunal for the Union or of a State (as the case may be). Their Lordships of the Supreme ...
Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(Raj)305; [2006]281ITR177(Raj)
1. The Tribunal, Jodhpur, has submitted the statement of case and referred the following questions of law arising out of appellate order dt. 10th Jan., 1995 passed in IT Appeal No. 1047/Jp/1994 for asst. yr. 1990-91 at the instance of assessee on an application for assessment (reference) under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961.'Q. No. 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the order passed by the CIT under Section 263 was correct and thereby upholding the same ?Q. No. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the order passed by the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue ?'2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are as under :That the assessee is a public limited company carrying on the business of textiles. For the asst. yr. 1990-91 the assessee returned a net loss of Rs. 5,72,56,454. The assessment was completed...
Secretary, Managing Committee Shri Mathura Prasad Gulab Devi Arya Girl ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj45; 2005(4)WLC366
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. All the respondents have been served. The matter is taken up for final disposal with the consent of learned Counsel for parties.2. The petitioners seek to quash the judgment dated February 23, 2005 of Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Tribunal Jaipur (for short 'Tribunal') whereby the application of respondent No. 1 (for short 'employee') under Section 21 of Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 (for short '1989 Act') was allowed and the termination order that was orally passed on June 9, 2004 against the employee was set aside and she was directed to be reinstated back in service with all consequential benefits.3. Mr. S.N. Kumawat, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners vehemently criticised the impugned judgment from various angles. The contention of learned Counsel is that the impugned judgment is based on surmises and conjectures and the Tribunal has presumed certain things which were not on record. I was...
Laxman Ram Meghwal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2492; 2005WLC(Raj)UC638
H.R. Panwar, J.1. This criminal revision petition Under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for short, 'the Code' is directed against the Order dated 5.4.2005 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act Cases, Balotra For Short, 'the Trial Court', whereby the Trial Court, on an application filed by the prosecution, arraigned the petitioners as accused and took cognizance against them and summoned them by non-bailable warrants. Aggrieved by the order impugned, the petitioners have filed the instant criminal revision petition.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the impugned order and the police challan papers as also the statements of as many as 12 prosecution witnesses which have been recorded till the date of passing of the impugned order.3. The facts giving rise to the instant revision petition are that on 11.7.2002, complainant PW-5 Uda Ram filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, Siwana for the offences Under Sections...
Brij Mohan Agarwal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2369; 2005(4)WLC308
K.C. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner through this petition seeks to quash the order dated 28.5.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khetri in revision petition No. 26/2005 arising out of the order dated 13.4.2005 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Khetri, by which the learned Magistrate has ordered to frame charge under Section 411 IPC against the accused petitioner.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of decision of the present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be summarised as under:3. On 24.3.2004 at 8.00 AM, complainant Ram Chandra lodged a written report at Police Station Khetri with regard to an incident of theft alleged to have taken place in the night intervening 15th and 16th August, 2003. It was alleged in the report that in the intervening night of 15th and 16th August, 2003 while his daughter Shakuntala was sleeping in a room, some one pulled her golden chain weighing 2 Tolas which she was wearing in her neck from the widow of the ...
Yash Industries Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2638
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the goods of the petitioner were seized by the offence of the Commercial Taxes Department when the goods were in vehicle no GJ-12/U-6192. The driver of the vehicle admitted his guilt before the assessing authority, upon which the assessing authority passed the order on 14th Oct., 2003 levying tax and penalty.3. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the assessment order was passed against Narendra Bhai @ Lal Bhai S/o Mehtab Singh and the transporter in compliance of the assessment order dated 14th Oct., 2003 paid the amount as demanded by the assessment order dated 14th Oct., 2003. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner in turn, paid that tax amount to the transporter and, therefore, the petitioner is aggrieved against the order dated 14th Oct., 2003 by which the assessing authority assessed the tax and penalty under the provisions of the R...
Chief Medical and Health Officer Vs. Judge Labour Court No. 2 and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2630; 2005(4)WLC680
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The petitioner seeks to quash the award dated August 7, 2003 of Labour Court No. 2, Jaipur whereby the reference made to it under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short '1947 Act') was answered in favour of the respondent workman and the order dated March 10, 1995, terminating the services of respondent workman was declared illegal and the workman was found entitled to be reinstated in the services with 25% back wages.2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently canvassed that the findings arrived at by learned Tribunal were wholly perverse, since the decision was based upon irrelevant factors not germane for the purpose of arriving at a correct finding of fact. Reliance is placed on Manager R.B.I. Bangalore vs. S. Mani (AIR 2005 SCW 1729). Learned Counsel for the petitioner alternatively canvassed that even if the termination order was found invalid the respondent workman could be compensated, his reinstatement was not...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »