Rajasthan Court May 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.
Nagar Parishad Vs. Megh Raj Choudhary and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2006
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj118
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 86/81 has been preferred by defendant-Municipal Board, Bikaner against the judgment and decree dated 6.9.1979 by which the trial court granted decree for perpetual injunction against the appellant-defendant Municipal Board, holding that the plot in dispute shall not be sold by auction on objection of defendant No. 2 but in case any neighbour raises any objection against the disposal of the land under Rule 23 of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974 (for short 'the Rules of 1974'), then the land be disposed of by public auction. The appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial court was dismissed by the appellate court vide judgment and decree dated 5.11.1080.S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 91/1981 is also against the same judgments and decrees referred above but by defendant No. 2, who is also seeking allotment of land in his fat our.3. The facts which are not in di...
Official Liquidator Vs. Vaidya Narayan Prasad Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-2006
Reported in: [2006(110)FLR1208]; [2007]75SCL168(Raj); 2006(3)WLC540
ORDERShiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. A direction has been sought by the applicant, who was appointed as Provisional Liquidator in Company Petition No. 4/95 on 12-1-1996, in the name of the respondent to hand over the balance agricultural land to the applicant Official Liquidator and also to make payment of damages. It is averred in the application by the Official Liquidator that Rajasthan Financial Corporation had taken the possession of the unit of the company situated at Khandela on 6-2-1988 for recovery of its dues. The said unit was sold to the respondent vide agreement, dated 1, 1989. As per statement of affairs filed by Director Subhash Chand Jain, company had two types of land measuring 13.25 bighas at Khandela out of which 20,000 Sq. Yards land was converted for industrial purposes. The remaining agricultural land is situated towards the north of the unit. The company had mortgaged the aforesaid unit along with aforesaid 20,000 Sq. Yards only to Rajasthan Financial Corporation which wa...
Tarun Shah and anr. Vs. Balbir Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC359
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kotputli dated 25.11.1994 while deciding Claim Case No. 93/92 Shallesh Kumar v. Balbir Singh and Ors.3. In a road accident which took place on 5.4.1990, five persons Smt. Girni Bai, Mahendra Shah, Smt. Sunita Shah, Kumari Pooja and Umesh, servant of the fami ly who were going along with other family members in Matador No. D1D-5945 from Jaipur to Delhi and met with an accident with truck No. DIL-3417 which was being driven by driver Balbir Singh, non-applicant No. 1 and as a result of which, these five persons lost their lives and some were injured.4. The learned Tribunal arrived at the finding that the said accident resulted on account of rash and negligent driving of truck No. DIL-3417 which hit the said Matador after going on wrong side of the road at about 3.00 a.m. in the night on Jaipur-Delhi Highway near Nawalpura Road.5. While determiningthe ...
Radhey Shyam and ors. Vs. Raja Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2164
Shiv Kumar Sharma and Prem Shankar Asopa, JJ.1. Mukesh, a young boy of 19 years, lost his life in an accident that occurred on 5.5.2002. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,82,000 to the claimants. Since learned Tribunal exonerated New India Assurance Co. Ltd. from the liability to pay compensation, the claimants preferred civil misc. appeal before the single Bench of this Court. Learned single Bench vide order dated 17.5.2004 dismissed the appeal with these observations:It is difficult to appreciate how the claimants are competent to address the court on the question that the driver of the vehicle which caused the accident was holding a valid driving licence for light motor vehicles and that his licence was valid up to the year 2014, when neither the owner nor the driver has come up in appeal against Claims Tribunal's award challenging the finding of the Tribunal that the driver of vehicle was holding a valid licence.2. We have heard the rival submission and sca...
Cto, Anti Evasion-i, Commercial Taxes Vs. Raghvar India Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2028; 2006(4)WLC369
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel at admission stage.2. The issue involved in this revision petition is that whether the assessee was entitled to exemption from tax under notification dated 7.3.94 on the purchase of oil seeds as raw material for manufacture of edible oil. The notification No. F. 4(8) FD Gr.IV/94-57 dated 7.3.1994 (S. No. 923) is reproduced herein under the ready reference:S. No. 923: F. 4(8) FDGr. IV/94-57 dated 7.3.1994S.O. 187. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4(2), RST Act, 1954, the State Govt. (1) hereby exempts from tax under the said Act, the sale or purchase of oil seeds for being used as raw material in the manufacture of edible (or non-ediole) oil in the State, on the following conditions, namely:(1) That such manufactured edible oil is sold by the manufacturer thereof within the State or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce; andThat such purchasing manufacturer furnishes a declaration in form ST- 17 to the selling dealer.This...
Asstt. Commissioner, Anti Evasion, Commercial Taxes Vs. Amtek India Lt ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2077; 2006(4)WLC238
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel at admission stage.2. The penalty Under Section 78(5) of the Act was imposed on the assessee on the ground that at the time of checking of vehicle on 7.9.01, the documents produced showed that bill No. 155 dated 29.9.2000 of M/s. Georg Fischer Disa Limited, Satyamangala Industrial Area, Tumkur, Karnataka raised on the respondent- assessee M/s. Amtek India Ltd., Bhiwadi along with delivery challan No. 5259 dated 3.9.01, form No. ST-18A in which invoice No. 155 was also mentioned and form No, ST-39 prescribed under Karnataka Sales Tax Act and bilty of North-Eastern Carrying Corporation accompanying the said goods were produced for verification. However date of the said invoice No. 155 dated 16.2.2000, was held to be of at earlier point of time than the date mentioned in the delivery challan of 3.9.01, therefore, the Assessing Authority held that said document was doubtful and, therefore, there was no compliance of Section 78(2)(a) of the RST Act...
Hariom Agarwal Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2379; 2006(4)WLC286
Harbans Lal, J.1. This Cr. Misc. petition Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is.directed against the order dated 8.11.2005 whereby, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Baran has taken cognizance of offences Baran has taken cognizance of offences against Chetan Kumar, Dharmendra Kumar and Praveen Kumar only in Cr. Case No. 279/2005 and has refused to take cognizance against Smt. Veena Jain, Snnt, Asha Jain and Vipul, non-petitioners No. 2 to 4.2. The relevant facts of the case are that a complaint came to be filed by the petitioner against non-petitioners No. 2 to 4 and Chetan Kumar, Dharmendra Kumar and Praveen Kumar for offences Under Sections 342, 353, 392, 324, 504 and 120-B I.P.C. in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Baran who forwarded it Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to Police Station Kotwali Baran for investigation. The police registered a case F.I.R. No. 59/2005 and after investigation submitted negative final report. The petitioner filed protest petition before the court whereupon, s...
Jawahari Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2857; 2006(3)WLC293
Khem Chand Sharma, J.1. This criminal appeal by appellant Jawahari Lal arises out of the judgment and order dated 18-9-1984 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kota, by which the learned Judge has convicted the appellant for offence under Sections 376, IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years.2. On 14-3-1982 at 5.00 p.m. P.W. 4 Mst. Lad Kanwar along with her brother Bala went to Police Station Budha-deet (Kota) and lodged oral report, thereby informing the police that at about 12.00 noon she had gone to her field to collect foddar. While she was busy in making a bundle of gram crop, all of a sudden, one Babu and appellant Jawahari came there from the field of Chhitar Bhadaria, caught hold of her and made her to fall on the ground and thereafter appellant committed rape on her. She raised an alarm but there was none to hear her cries. According to her, Babu also committed rape on her. She alleged that she sustained abrasions on her breasts and her bangles had...
Rajni Bala Sharma (Dr.) and ors. Vs. University of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-02-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2624; 2006(3)WLC201
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Since on similar set of facts same relief has been sought, both the writ petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.2. The petitioners are claiming appointment as temporary lecturer as also minimum of the salary payable to a regularly selected Lecturer. The petitioners have also prayed for directions to make regular selections to the post of Lecturers in the respondent University.3. This Court under similar circumstances, had tried to resolve the controversy by issuing certain directions in the case ot Om Prakash Pareek v. University of Rajasthan and another, SB Civil Writ Petition No. 4362/1996, decided on 11.10.1996 1997(1) WLC (Raj.) 676. While taking note of the entire scheme as well as all the rules, regulations and guidelines laid by the University Grants Commission from time to time, the Court issued following directions:1. The respondent University shall get the uncovered teaching work loss of the departments (subject wise)...
Radhey Shyam Vs. Brijendra Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-01-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2079; 2006(3)WLC252
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This is second appeal by the defendant Radhey Shyam son of Badan Singh against the judgment and decree by the two courts below decreeing the suit for specific performance in favour of Brijendra Singh son of Badan Singh, whose step brother defendant Radhey Shyam has challenged the said decree. The first Appellate Court by its judgment dated 11.12.1992 held that plaintiff Brijendra Singh was entitled to specific performance and the main defendant Gajendra Singh son of Vaktavar Singh was bound to execute a sale deed in favour of Arazi khasra No. 771 measuring 10 Biswa Barani agricultural land situated at village Jahangirpur, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur in pursuance of the agreement to sell executed by said Gajendra Singh on 12.5.1980 for the sale consideration of, Rs. 500/- which was paid by the plaintiff Brijendra Singh and possession of the said agricultural land was handed over to the plaintiff but the registered sale deed was not executed.2. According to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »