Rajasthan Court July 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.
Ram Swaroop Meena Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ARBLR496(Raj); RLW2007(1)Raj10
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The application has filed the instant application under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 (for short, '1996 Act') for appointment of Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of his claim and settlement of the dispute between the parties.2. The facts, in brief, as stated by the applicant are as follows:Applicant, a Railway Contractor, was awarded a work on September 2, 1996 vide contract agreement No. W/3189/T dated October 30, 1996. The cost of the work was Rs. 33,56,646/- and the work was to be completed till march 1, 1997. Tenth running bill of the applicant was not paid finally on the ground that the work was not completed within the stipulated period. The applicant stated vide application dated January 31, 1998 he requested for arrangement of sleepers at site as the sleepers and blast was supposed to be supplied by Railway Administration in time. The applicant completed most of the work for which certificate dated April 3, 1998 was issued. The applicant vide...
Bhanwar Lal and ors. Vs. Devlal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC742
ORDERShiv Kumar Sharma, J1. Heard rival submissions.2. The claimant-appellants being dissatisfied with the size of the award have preferred the instant appeal. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baran awarded the compensation in the sum of Rs. 58,000 to claimant-appellants vide award dated luly 17,2003 in relation to the incident occurred on May 24,2002 that took life of Kapil aged 7 years.3. It is contended by learned Counsel for the appellants that as per Second Schedule appended to Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the multiplier of 15 would have been to be applied.4. In Manju Devi v. Musafir Paswan IV (2005) A.C.C. 15 : 2005 A.C.J. 99, Their Lordships of the Supreme Court indicated in Para 3 thus:As set out in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for a boy of 13 years of age, a multiplier of 15 would have to be applied. As per the Second Schedule, he being a non-earning person, a sum of Rs. 15,000 must be taken as the income. Thus, the compensation comes to Rs. 2, 25,000...
Sukhdeo Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2658
R.P. Vyas, J.1. Appellant Sukhdeo Singh has filed two appeals; one through Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur and another through advocate, under Section 374, Cr.P.C. Both the appeals are is directed against the judgment dated 22.3.2002, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Jodhpur, whereby accused-appellant Sukhdeo Singh has been convicted and sentenced under Section 302, IPC, to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' additional imprisonment.2. In nut-shell, the prosecution case is that on 7.12.2001, at 9.35 a.m., one Girdhari Singh (PW. 1) lodged a report (Ex: P. 1) with the Police Station, Dechu stating, inter alia, therein that about two and half years ago, his deceased niece Geeta D/o. Roop Singh was married to appellant Sukhdeo Singh. Out of the wedlock, a son was born. It was further averred in the report that about fifteen days ago Sukhdeo Singh had dropped his wife Geeta at the house of Roo...
Kishan Lal Mathur Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2677
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner with the prayer that respondents be directed to immediately release all his retrial benefits and salary for the suspension period with interest @ 18% per annum. 2. The petitioner was retired from service of the respondents on 30.6.1997. He thereafter made number of representations to the respondents for grant of retrial benefits. The respondents, however, made payment of his retiral dues during the pendency of the writ petition. The petitioner has filed an additional affidavit with which he has placed on record a Chart giving the dates on which the payments were actually made to him. There are in all 9 heads in the said chart in which it has been mentioned that on which dates the payment was made but most of the payments were made to the petitioner in the year 2003 and 2004.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that this being the case of retired Government servant, it was expected of the respondents to ...
Union of India (Uoi) Through G.M. Vs. Jaipur Namada Factory
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3025
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This second appeal, under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, the 'CPC'), on behalf of the defendant appellant, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 10th of May, 2000, passed by the Additional District Judge No. 2, Jaipur City, Jaipur, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 83/95, whereby the appeal of the plaintiff-respondent was allowed an the suit of the plaintiff-respondent was decreed against the judgment and decree dated 23rd of September, 1995 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Jaipur City, Jaipur, in Civil Suit No. 90/95, whereby the suit of the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of a sum of Rs. 6,297.68 p. was dismissed.3. Learned Counsel for the plaintiff-respondent raised a preliminary objection about maintainability of the present second appeal. His contention is that this second appeal has arisen out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 6297.68 ...
Rajasthan Ground Water Subordinate Service Association and ors. Vs. St ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3400
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. The Rajasthan Ground Water Subordinate Service Association alongwith its three members (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners') has filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to upgrade the pay of Technical Assistant (Hydrogeology, Geophysics) in the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 from the date Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1998 (in short 'the Rules of 1998') came into force and quashing and setting aside Annexure 7 dated 14.6.2002 whereby their representation was rejected.2. I have heard Mr. Vinay Jain, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. N.M. Lodha, learned Additional Advocate General for the State.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Vinay Jain has submitted that the petitioners are working on the post of Technical Assistant (Hydrogeology, Geophysics) in the Ground Water Department of the State. There is a similar post in Central Ground Water Board with the nomenclature of Senior T...
Suresh Chandra and Dhan Raj Vs. Shri Hanuman Prasad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3090; 2006(4)WLC452
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the plaintiff appellants.2. This second appeal, under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on behalf of the plaintiff-appellants, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 8th of February, 1986, passed by the Civil Judge & Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Beawar, in Civil Appeal No. 58/83, whereby the appeal of the plaintiff-appellants was dismissed against the order dated 23.2.1982 passed by the Munsiff Magistrate, 1st Class, Beawar, whereby the learned lower Court allowed the application of the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff-appellants.3. The plaintiff-appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction, declaration of title, damages and possession in respect of the property in dispute against the private defendants as well as Nagar Parishad, Beawar.4. The defendants No. 1 and 2 had entered into a compromise and this fact has a mention in the judgment of the lo...
Smt. Saeeda Mohammad Kayum Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Raj284
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. This appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by Smt. Saeeda wife of Mohammad Kayum and Mohammad Kayum son of Shri Suleman. against the Judgment and decree dated 4th of January. 1984 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4. Jaipur City. Jaipur, In Civil Revision Appeal No. 67/81 (229/80), whereby he partly allowed the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 15-11-1980 passed by the Additional Munsiff Magistrate, Jaipur West, Jaipur, in Civil Suit No. 229/71, whereby the suit of the plaintiff-appellants was dismissed. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the second appeal are that Initially sole plaintiff, the appellant No. 1. Smt. Saeeda filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in the lower Court on 26th of March. 1971 wherein it was pleaded that she is a citizen of India and her engagement took place with defendant No. 4 Mohammad Kayum in the year 1955 and she was married with him in the year 1964. It was...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bharti Solanki and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2644
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. By way of the appeal, the insurer of the vehicle involved in a fatal accident, having been accorded permission to contest the claim for compensation on merits, seeks to question the award dated 18.3.2006 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bikaner, in Claim Case No. 120 of 2005 on its quantification of compensation.2. Relevant background facts are that on 19.2.2005 at about 3 p.m. the deceased Sanjay Solanki, aged about 35 years, while riding his motor cycle was hit from behind by a truck bearing registration No. RJ 07-G 1457, insured with the appellant, belonging to Kheta Ram, non-applicant No. 1 and driven by Chunni Lal, non-applicant No. 2; the deceased sustained head injury and succumbed while on way to hospital. The wife and minor children of the deceased made a claim for compensation on account of accidental death of Sanjay Solanki in the sum of Rs. 97,90,808 against the driver, owner and insurer of the offending truck with the submissions, inter ...
C.T.O. Vs. Allied Electronic and Magnetics Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2650
Prakash Tatia, J.1. This bunch of revision petitions involve question of levy of tax on sale of floppy diskettes. The dispute is two folds, one under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and another under the Central Sales Tax Act. Two revision petitions; S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 1245/99 and 1251/99 are arising under the RST Act. The rest of the revisions petitions are in relation to the levy of sales tax on sale of the floppy diskettes under the CST Act.2. The detail of dates of various orders as well as of the years for which orders were passed by the authorities as well as of actual liability are not relevant for the purpose of deciding these revision petitions because on those points there is no controversy. The assessing authority passed the assessment order to two matters under RST Act imposing tax, interest and penalty under various heads and the main imposition of tax was on the sale of floppy diskettes. In the opinion of the assessing authority, the floppy diskettes independent...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »