Rajasthan Court October 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.
Hasina Bano Vs. Alam Noor
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-09-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj49; RLW2007(1)Raj566
ORDERR.S. Chauhan, J.1. The fight over the payment of 'mehar' (dower) has brought the parties before this Court. The appellant-wife has demanded the payment of 'mehar' from the non-petitioner-husband; the latter has denied his liability to pay the same on the ground that she has relinquished her right to the 'mehar' through an agreement. The trial Court and the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Bhilwara have upheld the non-petitioner's contention. The petitioner is, thus, challenging the Order dated 6-6-1997 whereby the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, No. 2, Bhilwara has rejected the claim for 'mehar' by the petitioner against the non-petitioner. She is also challenging the Order dated 22-6-1998, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 1, Bhilwara has dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the Order dated 6-6-1997.2. The brief facts of the case are that, in 1982, the petitioner and non-petitioner were married according...
Ajay Type Writers Vs. Dhanpat Raj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-09-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj1483
N.P. Gupta, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal, in a suit for eviction, decreed by both the learned courts below, on the ground of reasonable and bonafide necessity.2. The facts of the case are, that the plaintiff filed the present suit for eviction, alleging interalia, that the property described in para-1 of the plaint belonged to one Hastimal. This comprises of two shops on the ground floor, being shops No. 2 and 3, which were purchased along with second storey, by the plaintiff, and the first storey was purchased by the plaintiffs father, from said Hastimal, by separate registered sale deeds. Both the shops belong to plaintiff, the first storey is of the ownership of the plaintiff's father, while the second storey is in the ownership of plaintiffs, and that plaintiff and his father live in the upper storey, above the two shops. With this it was alleged, that the defendant had become defaulter, as he had taken the shop on rent at a monthly rent of Rs. 125/-, and had paid rent upto 30...
Udai Singh @ Rajendra Singh @ Raju Bana and anr. Vs. State of Rajastha ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-09-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj1142
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Udai Singh @ Rajendra Singh @ Raju Bana and Ummed Singh, the appellants herein, were put to trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2 Kota, who vide judgment dated February 20, 2003 convicted and sentenced them under Section 302 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 3000/-, in default to further suffer three months imprisonment.2. It is the prosecution case that on January 10, 2001 around 9 PM while Mohan Lal (now deceased) proceeded with Babu Lal Gurjar to his house, Shambhu Singh opened fire at Mohan Lal and appellants Udai Singh and Ummed Singh inflicted injuries with lathi and Kuntia on the person of Mohan Lal, who died on the way while taken to the Hospital. Satya Narayan (Pw.1) submitted written report (Ex.P-1) at police station Bapawar Kalan where case under Section 302/34 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Since Shambhu Singh died during investigation, charge sheet was filed only against the appellants. In ...
State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Surendra Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj559
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. The petitioner State of Rajasthan in this writ petition has challenged the award dated 23.3.2001 passed by the Labour Court, Bikaner. A reference was made to learned Labour Court by appropriate government on the question whether raising of dispute by the respondent workman Shri Surendra Singh after ten years was justified and further whether termination of his service by the management by order dated 16.1.1984 was legal and justified and if not what relief workman was entitled to.2. The case set up by the respondent workman before the Labour Court was that he was appointed as Beldar on daily wage basis against a clear cut vacant and permanent post on 1st December, 1981. He served under Junior Engineer Shri Harjeet Singh upto 30th June, 1983 and thereafter under Junior Engineer Shri L.P. Garg from 1.7.1983 to 31.10.1983 and thereafter under yet another Junior Engineer Shri Tilakraj Ahuja from 1.11.1983 to 31.12.1983 and then again under said Shri Harjeet Singh from ...
Sunder Vs. Ramsahal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj940
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. Like boxers in a ring, this is the fifth round of boxing between the landlord and the tenant. The fight is continuing not because of the fighters themselves, but because the trial court has failed to follow the directions issued by the first appellate Court and by this Court. Needlessly, the litigant are suffering the endless judicial voyage for the last thirty-five years. The landlord is still hoping for getting the tenant vacated from his premises; the tenant is enjoying the fruits of judicial lethargy. This fight must end now.2. Way back in 1971, the landlord, the respondent before this court, had filed a suit for eviction on the grounds of bona fide necessity, nuisance, change of user, and default in the payment of rent. However, the trial court dismissed the said suit vide its order dated 2.12.1974. Therefore, the landlord filed an appeal before the first appellate court. Along with the appeal, he also filed an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Pro...
Mohan Lal (Since Deceased) Through Lrs. and ors. Vs. Thakurji Shri Shy ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj969
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Defendant No. 1 Mohan Lal has preferred this second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 24th of September, 1986 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur, in Civil Regular Appeal No. 54/1981, whereby the First appellate court set aside the judgment and decree passed by the lower court dismissing the suit of the plaintiff, and decreed the suit of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 for pre-emption in respect of the property, in dispute.2. This Court formulated the following substantial questions of law involved in this second appeal:1. Whether in absence of any pleading, evidence or issue as to the matters covered by the provisions of Section 6(1)(ii) and (iii) pleading the stair case to be common and/or the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2 being those of the owners of the property servient or dominant to the property transferred having been specifically pleaded and established?2. Whether the pla...
Mastan Singh Pannu Vs. Harjinder Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj239
Harbans Lal, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of the order dated 5.7.2006 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 10, Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby he has dismissed the application of the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. read with Sections 38 and 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.2. The relevant facts giving rise to this petition are that on the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter called in short 'Act of 1881') a plea has been takeathat the cheque in question which was dishonoured on 3.9.2004 with the endorsement that the account has been closed, was a blank cheque which has been filled in by the complainant himself and not by the accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner therefore, filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. read with Sections 38 and 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 that the writing on the cheque may be got compared by the expert as the accused-petitioner has in h...
Akhtar Ali Sayyed Vs. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj305
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner-Akhtar Ali Sayyed, who has prayed for a writ of mandamus by directing the respondents to issue a final seniority list thereby placing his name at serial No. 21 below Shri Juhara Ram in the cadre of L.D.C's. and consider his case for promotion to the post of U.D.C. prior to consideration of his junior in the cadre of L.D.Cs. and along with aforesaid Shri Juhara Ram and further prayed that during the pendency of the writ petition if any provisional list detrimental to his interest is issued, then the same may also be quashed and also prayed for quashment of the order dated 31st July, 2002 promoting thereby respondents Nos. 3 and 4 to the post of U.D.C. ignoring the claim of the petitioner.2. The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of L.D.C. in the office of District & Sessions Judge, Balotra vide order dated 07th April, 1984. He was later confirmed on the said post vide order dated 14th September, 1986. Being...
indira Devi (Smt.) Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj92; 2006(1)WLC495
Mohammed Rafiq, J.1. Under challenge in this petition is the order dated 04th March, 1991 whereby the petitioner's husband was dismissed from service. It has been prayed that the said order be quashed and set aside and consequently directions may be issued to the respondents to consider her case for appointment on compassionate ground and the respondents be further directed to grant family pension to the petitioner in accordance with the proviso to Rule 268B of the Rajasthan Service Rules.2. Facts in brief as unfolded in the writ petition are that the petitioner's husband was appointed in the service of respondents as LDC vide order dated 04th September, 1979 on temporary basis and he was subsequently made permanent by order dated 19th June, 1981. The petitioner's husband was some time in the year 1985 transferred from the office of District Collector, Pali to the office of District Collector, Pali to the office of District Collector, Jodhpur. In the aforesaid manner the petitioner's h...
Ravi Bhatt Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj476
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in the instant writ petition is to the orders dated February 28, 1996 and October 4, 1996 of the Mining Engineer Dholpur as well as the order dated June 9, 1997 of Deputy Secretary Mines dismissing the revision of petitioner.2. Contextual facts depict that the petitioner was granted mining lease for sand stone in village Kudina District Dholpur, which was valid upto February 21, 1980. The petitioner applied for renewal of mining lease. Since the application for renewal of mining lease could not be disposed of in time it came under the category of deemed rejection. On filing revision application the deemed rejection was set aside on May 18, 1982 and the subordinate officers were granted time to dispose of the renewal application. Later on the State Government cancelled the order dated May 18, 1982 in exercise of suo moto review power. The said order was called in question by the petitioner by filing revision application before the Central Government, wh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »