Rajasthan Court December 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.
Kamal Nayan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj1217
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment dated May 27, 2002 of the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases) Alwar whereby Kamal Nayan 2 Bablu and Anil Kumar, the appellants herein, have been respectively convicted under Section 302/34 and 302 IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. The prosecution story runs as under:The informant Kamla Devi (PW-1) lodged a written report on July 11, 2000 at the Police Station Kotwali Alwar stating therein that on the said day around 2 p.m. while her husband and son were not at home Hariram, Anil and Arun Athwal gave beating to her. Against at 3.30 p.m. they came to her house, quarreled with her and told her that they had already killed her son and they would now kill her husband. On inquiry she found that these miscreants had stabbed her son near old temple of Jagannathji and he was admitted in the hos...
In Re: Modern Syntex (India) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: [2009]148CompCas843(Raj); [2007]76SCL157(Raj)
ORDERShiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. This petition under Section 391(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 (in short 'Act of 1956') has been filed seeking sanction of scheme of compromise to be binding on all the secured creditors of the petitioner-company Modern Syntex (India) Ltd.2. The petitioner-company was incorporated on 23-5-1989 under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 as a part of Modern Group of Companies. The authorised share capital of the petitioner-company is Rs. 12,500 lakhs (Rupees twelve thousand five hundred lakhs) divided into 12,50,00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each. The issued, subscribed and paid up share capital of the petitioner-company is Rs. 15,821.66 lakhs (Rupees fifteen thousand eight hundred and twenty one lakhs) divided into 11,34,98,333 equity shares of Rs. 10 and 15,00,000 16 per cent cumulative redeemable preference shares of Rs. 100 each fully paid up).3. The petitioner-company is presently engaged in the manufacture and sale of polyester filament yarn, blended y...
Bagdi Bai (Smt.) Vs. Smt. Pushpa Bai and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN273
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is seeking relief against the respondent No. 1 only and the relief of the appellant is that the respondent No. 1 be restrained from alienating the property in dispute which she has purchased from the respondent No. 2.3. It appears that the dispute arose because of sale of agriculture land by respondent No. 2 Smt. Bholi Bai, who according to the appellant, is not wedded wife of deceased Narayan, father of the appellant.4. Learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that the appellant filed a suit in the revenue Court and the injunction application was pending in the revenue Court, still she has filed the present suit and sought injunction which was refused by the Court below after considering the fact that the suit property was mutated in the name of the appellant and the respondent No. 2 also and both of them dealt with the property for such a long period.5. I ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›