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.
Shanti Devi (Smt.) and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-12-2006
Reported in: I(2006)ACC692; RLW2006(1)Raj875; 2006(1)WLC553
K.S. Rathore, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioners against the order dated 1.9.2005 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 4, Ajmer in application No. 80/2000. The petitioner by way of this writ petition further seeks direction directing the respondents to disburse the amount in the terms indicated in the award dated 6.4.2005.2. Vide impugned order dated 1.9.2005, the Claims Tribunal directed that owner of the vehicle should furnish the security and after taking security from the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident, the amount of the award can only be disbursed. The Claims Tribunal while passing the said order, also considered the judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pramod Kumar Agarwal and Ors. v. Mushtari Begum and Ors. reported in 2004 (3) TAC 289 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Najpann and Ors. reported in 2004 (2) TAC 12.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment rendered by thi...
C.T.O. Vs. Siddu Palace
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-12-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj998
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Jarvis, a jurist of his times once said 'while taxes and death, both are inevitable, being taxed to death is not'.2. The case present before this Court poses a question as to whether the entertainment tax collected by Panchayat Samiti under the Provisions of Rajasthan Entertainments (And Advertisement) Tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) discharges the liability of the assessee under the Act and, therefore, State Government through its Commercial Taxes Department again cannot demand the same tax on the same entertainment and for the same period.3. In fact, what should have been really a tug of war between the two departments of the State Government, its left and right arm, the right arm of the State Government, the Commercial Taxes Department without asking a question from the Panchayat Samiti, grabbed hold of the poor assessee and slapped upon him the demand of same entertainment tax, which it had already paid to the Panchayat Samiti.4. The chequered h...
Hardayal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-12-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1824; 2006(2)WLC701
Shashi Kant Sharma, J.1. Instant appeal has been filed by the accused appellant Hardayal against the judgment dated 23.6.2000 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kishangarh, Ajmer whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge convicted the accused appellant Hardayal for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months R.I.2. Ms. Neelu Mathur was appointed as amicus curiae for appellant and arguments were heard.3. The brief facts which are relevant and essential for the disposal of this appeal are as under:4. PW-13 Manbhar Devi has lodged a written report Ex.P-1 on 1.6.98 at 7 a.m. to SHO Police Station Bandara Sindari District-Ajmer wherein it was alleged that her husband was working in Municipality and on 31.5.98 he came his home at Harmada. It was also alleged that in the night her husband was sleeping on the roof of the house. In the morning at about 5.30 am, sh...
Sanwat Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-12-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1820
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant was indicted before the learned Sessions Judge Sikar for murdering his wife Gopali. Learned Judge vide Judgment July 19, 2000 convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 IPC to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer one month imprisonment.2. The first information of the offence was lodged by the appellant himself at Police Station Sikar on August 30, 1999 at 8.15 AM. There is no eye witness to the occurrence. The principle evidence against the appellant consists of the first information report, which contains a full confession of guilt by the appellant. If this report is excluded, the other evidence on record is insufficient to convict the appellant. The core question in the instant appeal is whether the statement or any portion of it is admissible in evidence.3. The first information report reads as under:I have been residing for the last 4-5 years in my in-law's house Chokha ka Bas. My father-in-l...
Nand Lal Mahesh Kumar and anr. Vs. Beekalene Fabrics Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
Reported in: II(2007)BC241; RLW2006(2)Raj1056
Jitendra Ray Goyal, J.1. The plaintiffs have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge No. 8, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 12.9.2003 passed in a civil suit No. 61/1991 whereby he dismissed the plaintiff's suit for rendition of accounts and recovery of money on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.2. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiffs filed a suit for rendition of accounts and recovery of money against the defendant with the averments that plaintiffs-firm are sister concerns and constituted by the members of one and the same family. Both the plaintiffs-firms worked at Jaipur as Commission Agents of the defendant-company and the amount relating to one plaintiff-firm was adjusted in the account of other plaintiff firm. It is also averred that before commencement of the agency business, Shri Rajan Sehgal, who was the director of the defendant company, came at Jaipur and settled the terms and conditions with the partners of the plaint...
Om Prakash Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1304; 2006(2)WLC158
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Since, on similar set of facts, same reliefs have been claimed by the petitioners, the above writ petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.2. Petitioners have made following prayers in the writ petitions:--(i) To struck down the criteria for promotion as laid down in Rule 24, especially the entry in columns 4 and 7 to the post of S. No. 3 under the head of Administrative Officers and to the post of S. No. 1 under the head of Technical Officers, being violative of the provision of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.(ii) To declare that the clubbing of four different posts i.e., Assessor, Office Supdt., Revenue Officer grade II and Executive Officer Class IV for the purpose of promotion to the post of Executive Officer Class III and Revenue Officer Grade I is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the provisions of equality of law as well as provisions of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.(iii) Further be plea...
Ashok Kumar @ Sarkari Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj1818; 2006(2)WLC689
Shahsi Kant Sharma, J.1. Instant appeal has been filed by the accused appellant Ashok Kumar @ Sarkari against the judgment dated 14.11.2000 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shahpura District-Jaipur whereby the appellant Ashok Kumar @ Sarkari was convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 397/34 IPC and was sentenced for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC for life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- and for the offence under Section 397/34 IPC for seven years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months RI for each of the fine.2. Miss Anupama Parashar was appointed as amicus curiae for appellant and arguments were heard.3. The brief facts which are relevant and essential for the disposal of this appeal are as under:4. PW-1 Banshidhar lodged a written report on 1.10.99 to SHO Shahpura wherein he mentioned that Mst. Gulari was living in his neighboring house. On 30.9.1999, he was searching her forgiving meal on the ...
Pramod Kumar and anr. Vs. Bherulal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Raj206
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.Following substantial question of law is involved in this appeal:Whether the first appellate Court erred in law in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff so far as it relates to Gokhra and Chajja?2. At the request of learned Counsel for the parties, the appeal is finally disposed of.3. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit against the defendants/appellants for mandatory and prohibitory injunction alleging that the plaintiff and the defendants are neighbours having their house adjoining to each other. The defendants started construction of the house after demolishing his old house. The construction continued for 10-15 days when the plaintiff was not in the town. When the plaintiff reached to his house on 5-5-1996, he found that the defendants have constructed some projections measuring 3 feet x 10 feet hanging over public chowk. The defendants also raised some construction adjoining to the wall of th...
Rana Ahmad and ors. Vs. Mangal @ Mangal Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
Reported in: II(2006)ACC335
Narendre Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. These two appeals, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are directed against the judgment/award dated 6.8.1993 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sambhar Lake, Jaipur in Motor Accident Claim Case Nos. 527 1992 and 221/1993, whereby, the learned Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs. 2,56,000 in Motor Accident Claim case No. 52/1992 for the death of Jai Singh, who died in motor vehicle accident, which took place on 12.11.1987 and Rs. 30,000 for loss of damage to the property in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 221/1993. Being aggrieved with the same, the appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation.3. Learned Counsel for the claimant appellants contended that in MAC Case No. 221/92 filed by Rana Ahmad, the Tribunal committed an illegality in deducting Rs. 15,000 for sale of scrape of the vehicle, without any evidence on record. He contended that he claimed total...
Bafati Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj986; 2006(2)WLC154
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. This appeal stems from the judgment dated September 25, 2000, rendered by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases) Kota in Sessions Case No. 100/1999, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 302 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer one year rigorous imprisonment.2. The prosecution story as pictured during trial is as under:-On July 26, 1999 around 12.15 p.m. while Narain Singh, SHO was standing on the outer gate of Police Station Maqbara, Kota, he was verbally informed that Bafati (appellant) had inflicted knife blows on the person of Prem Chand Regar (deceased), who was removed to the hospital. This information was entered into Rojnamcha and police party headed by Mahaveer Prasad, ASI proceeded to MBS Hospital. In the Parcha Bayan (Ex.P/6) recorded by Mahaveer Prasad, ASI at 12.45 a.m. Prem Chand stated that around 12.00 Noon the appellant came to his house and dem...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »