Rajasthan Court January 2006 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.
Panchi Devi and ors. Vs. Surajmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-2006
Reported in: II(2006)ACC401
K.C. Sharma, J.1. Through this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellants seek to modify the award dated 21.2.1994 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur whereby the learned Judge has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,65,000.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the award sought to be modified. The learned Judge, on consideration of evidence and material available on record and having concluded that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of jeep No. RJ-14-T-0253 by its driver has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,65,000 under the various heads, making the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 liable to pay the award amount to the claimant, jointly and severally.3. The only grievance of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the age of the deceased was 42 years at the time of accident and, therefore, the learned Tribunal, while assessing the income of the deceased should have applied the...
Rajasthan Housing Board Shopping Centre Vikas Samiti Vs. State of Raja ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj588; 2006(2)WLC372
Prem Shanker Asopa, J.1. The instant writ petition is directed against the action of the respondents of carrying out the construction in the park area measuring 18x18 mtrs. marked 'A' in the map (Annex.-I) and the marked portion 'C' to 'D' in the park-A in Annex.III. The petitioner is also seeking direction to restrain the respondents from making any construction in the area marked 'B' in Annex.III.2. In the writ petition the main grievance is only with regard to Park-A situated at Shopping Centre constructed in Sector No. 3 of the Rajasthan Housing Board Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur by Snaking assertion that the respondents have permitted the vegetable vendors to carry on the construction of shops which will reduce the area of the park from 18 mtrs. North-South to 9 mtrs. on the ground that the Housing Board prepared a scheme known as Shastri Nagar Housing Scheme and after approval of the Government, the same was published in Gazette wherein three pieces 'A', 'B' and 'C' marked in An...
Mohammad Salim Vs. Smt. ShahIn Sah and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Raj200; RLW2006(1)Raj643; 2006(2)WLC176
Prem Shanker Asopa, J.1. By the instant writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 18.10.2005 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) (South), Kota whereby the applications for temporary injunction as well as mandatory injunction for restoration of the possession has been accepted. The said order has remained upheld in appeal by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Kola vide his order dated 30.11.2005.2. Briefly stated the relevant facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondents filed a civil suit for permanent injunction along with an application for temporary injunction but when the plaintiff-respondents were dispossessed from the shop in question, they filed an application for mandatory injunction with the prayer for restoration of the possession. In both the applications, it has been averred by the plaintiff-respondents that they are tenant of the petitioner and running a beauty parlor in the shop of House No. 4-Cha-5 of Vigyan Nagar, Kota. The shop was taken on ...
State of Rajasthan (the) and ors. Vs. Firdos Tarannum
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj827; 2006(2)WLC596
ORDERSub- Recognition of different Urdu Examinations conducted by Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh.The Government have decided to recognize the following Examinations conducted by the Jamia Urdu, Aligarh as equivalent to the examinations noted against each so far as the Stapdard of Urdu is concerned for purpose of recruitment in the appropriate fields under this State Government.Name of the Examination - Equivalent to the standard of Urdu in the following Examinations.Adib High SchoolAdib Mahir IntermediateAdib Kamil B.A.Sd/- A.L. Roongta(A.L. Roongta)Deputy Secretary to the Government.Copy forwarded to1 to 7 and 1 to 3.3. Since the State of Rajasthan had recognized the qualifications possessed by the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner contended before the writ court that he was eligible to be appointed. The Department has not considered the case of the petitioner and, therefore, the writ was preferred.4. The State Government ignored to file reply in the writ petition. The matter was disposed o...
Puran Mal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1052
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. Faced with a trial under the NDPS Act (henceforth to be referred as 'the Act'), and wanting to protect his liberty and reputation, the petitioner is running from pillar to post. Even earlier the petitioner had challenged the charge order dated 12.1.2005 framed by the learned Trial Court by filing a Criminal Revision Petition No. 211/2005. Since, the directions given by this Court vide Order dated 2.6.2005 have not been complied by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Cases), Jaipur, the petitioner has again challenged the charge order, which was framed vide order dated 14.10.2005.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 21.12.2003, a truck had turned turtle on National Highway No. 8 near Kotputali, which was causing a serious traffic jam. When the police reached the spot, they could discover neither the driver nor the 'Khalasi' of the said truck. When the police emptied the truck, they discovered that besides carrying white limestone powder, the truck was also carrying ...
Rajul Arora Vs. Jai NaraIn Vyas University and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1054
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. Although listed for admission, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties and in view of a short question involved, the matter has been heard finally.2. The only question involved in this writ petition is about rounding up of the marks for the purpose of admission to LL.B Ist year. The petitioner has obtained a graduation degree of Bachelor of Arts in the year 1997, and as per the marks obtained by her in graduation i.e., 807 out of 1800, her percentage comes to 44.83. However, for the purpose of admission in degree course of Bachelor of Law (LL.B)., minimum 45 percent are required. 45% of 1800 comes to 810, whereas the petitioner has obtained 807 marks. The petitioner submitted application form to the respondent University for admission to LL.B Course on 11.7.2005 and according to the petitioner, if rounding up is permitted, then her percentage of 44.83 could definitely be taken as 45% and there is no reason why she should be deprived of admission to L...
Anmol Granites Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(199)ELT769(Raj)
ORDERRajesh Balia, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. In all these writ petitions, common issue has been raised as to whether cutting and polishing of granite slabs and tiles from the block amounts to manufacture and the end product becomes subject to charge of excise duty under the Central Excise Act, 1944.3. The notice have been issued in all these cases to the respective petitioners that the Supreme Court in the case of Pratap Singh v. CCE 2003 (156) E.L.T. A382 has upheld that cutting and polishing of granite slabs and tiles from the block amounts to be manufacture and therefore, details of manufactured commodity and the value of such commodity on clearance were sought from the assessee.4. The petitioners in all these cases have contended that cutting of granites block into slabs and tiles and their polishing does not amount to manufacturing process as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme in the case of Aman Marbles 2003 (58) RLT 595. Based on that premise, the petit...
Sandeep Thakran Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2709; 2006(2)WLC197
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Though the offence for which Sandeep Thakran and Pradeep Kumar, the appellants herein, have been charged, is gruesome and revolts the human conscience but it is to be seen whether the prosecution is able to bridge the gap between 'may be true' and 'must be true' by clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence before condemned the appellants guilty. The appellants who were placed on trial before learned Special Judge (Fake Currency Notes Cases), Jaipur City, Jaipur were convicted and sentenced as under-Under Section 302 IPC:Each to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2500/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonment.Under Section 394 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 1500/-, in default to further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment.Under Section 201 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer two months rigorous imprisonment.Substantive...
Chand Devi and ors. Vs. Ajmat @ Kangari and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC15
Y.R. Meena, J.1. The husband of the appellant No. 1, father of the appellant Nos. 2 to 5 and son of appellant Nos. 6 and 7 expired in the road accident on 15th June, 1988. A claim petition was filed for compensation of Rs. 31,05,000.2. Tribunal while considering the earning of the deceased and the fact that wife of the deceased was getting pension as well as she got the appointment on compassionate ground, to that extent reduced the amount of compensation and awarded the compensation of Rs. 1,72,000.3. In writ petition before learned Single Judge, learned Single Judge has enhanced it to Rs. 2,25,000.4. Counsel for the appellant submits that when the deceased was in service, the multiplier which is given in the schedule should be applied.5. Even if that multiplier of schedule is to be applied, the amount which the wife of the deceased is getting by way of pay on account of her appointment on compassionate ground, that cannot be ignored as the compensation is financial assistance on deat...
Associated Stone Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-19-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Raj148; RLW2006(2)Raj1130; 2006(2)WLC8
Prem Shanker Asopa, J.1. Since the common questions of facts and law are involved in the aforesaid two writ petitions filed by the same petitioners as the 'whether the royalty is to be levied on the excavation of mineral or polished product of the mineral in the factory situated in leased area which is to be sold in the market and the further question is involved as to whether the State Government and its functionaries have right to charge royalty on 10% breakage of the mineral in polishing the same vide respective Assessment order of the year 1991-92 and 1992-93.' Therefore, both the writ petitions are being decided by common order.2. The case of the petitioner in writ petition No. 4312/1994 is taken as leading case. Briefly stated the relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner-Company is dealing in the business of excavating of lime stone and polishing the same, which is popularly known as Kota Stone and further despatching both rough and polished stones outside the mining ar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »