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.
Santokh Singh Vs. Punjab and Sindh Bank
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: [2007(112)FLR110]; (2007)ILLJ919Raj; RLW2006(4)Raj2701
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the prayer that the respondents be directed to make payment of pension and commutation and may be further directed to pay the cost of litigation. In the petition it has been stated that Punjab & Sindh Bank (in short 'the Bank') introduced Punjab & Sindh Bank Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme-2000 (in short 'the Scheme of 2000'). The petitioner being eligible to seek voluntary retirement under the Scheme of 2000 applied for the same and his case for voluntary retirement was accepted w.e.f. 29.1.2001. Petitioner has served 13 years of service with the bank. He being a pensioner applied for the commutation of pension with necessary documents. His case was sent to respondent No. 2 namely, Manager, Punjab & Sindh Bank, Head Office, Provident Fund Department, New Delhi who vide letter dated 31.7.2001 informed the petitioner that he was not eligible for pension. The petitioner thereupon served a noticed for deman...
Gulab Kanwar (Smt.) and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3076
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Since on same set of facts similar relief has been sought, both the writ petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.2. The matter appears to have a checkered history. A plot measuring 4833.33 square yards was purchased by one Rai Bahadur Himmat Singh from the erstwhile State by registered sale deed executed on 4.8.1949. The plot was identified as plot No. C-4A in Scheme E of Banipark, Jaipur. In the sale deed apart from the measurement of the plot, all the four sides had also clearly been mentioned. On the eastern side there existed plot No. C-6, on the western side plot No. C-2, a road on the northern side and plot No. D-241 on the southern side. The above plot No. C-4A was later on sold by the said Rai Bahadur Himmat Singh to one Thakur Ummed Singh on 23.5.1950 by a registered sale deed. In the sale deed so executed in favour of Thakur Ummed Singh, the measurement and the identification of the plot were the same as mentioned in t...
Kalu @ Laxmi Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2501
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in these three appeals is to the legality of judgment dated January 28, 2002 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Kota, whereby the appellants, five in number, have been convicted and sentenced as under:Appellant Kalu @ Laxmi Narayan:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months.Appellants Kamal @ Kamal Kumar, Sattu @ Satya Narayan, Mukesh @ Anil KumarUnder Section 302/149 IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months.Appellants Kalu @ Laxmi Narayan, Kamal @ Kamal Kumar, Sattu @ Satya Narayan, Mukesh & Anil KumarUnder Section 148 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. Put briefly the prosecution case is as under:On November 9, 1999 at 10.15 PM informant Pappu @ Mukesh (PW. 7) submi...
Ramu Alias Ram Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4363; RLW2007(3)Raj2498
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Ramesh, a vagabond, who spent major part of his life on the footpath of MGD) School was found dead lying in a pool of blood on the same footpath. The appellant (another vagabond) was nabbed for committing murder of Ramesh and put to trial before learned Special Judge (Sati Nivaran) Rajasthn and Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur, City Jaipur, who vide judgment dated July 17, 2001 placing reliance on the sole testimony of a child witness convicted the appellant Under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. Put briefly the prosecution case is as under:In the morning of March 24, 2000 on seeing the dead body lying on a footpath, somebody informed police station Laikothi Jaipur over telephone. The police arrived and recorded parcha bayan (Ex.P-13) of Vikram Singh, Rickshaw Puller, according to which the appellant caused injuries with stone on the head...
Manju Bhalla and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar Dhongda and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC71
G.S. Sarraf, J.1. The claimant-appellants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment/award dated 29.5.1995 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur.2. The brief facts are that one Harish Singh Bhalla was coming from Agra to Jaipur by car DDD-946 on 2.9.1990. The above car collided with a camel-cart at about 10.30 p.m. at a place within the jurisdiction on the police station, Bassi and the said Harish Singh Bhalla died in consequence of the injuries sustained by him in the accident. Appellant No. 1 is the wife, appellant No. 2 is the son, appellant No. 3 is the daughter and appellant No. 4 is the mother of the deceased. Respondent No. 1 is the owner, respondent No. 2 is the driver and respondent No. 3 is the Insurance Company of the car DDD-946. After hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal by judgment dated 29.5.1995 passed an award of Rs. 2,70,000 in favour of the appellants. Aggrieved by this judgment/award the clai...
Manju Kanwar (Smt.) Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2505
Govind Mathur, J.1. The petitioner is a widow of Late Shri Samrath Singh who died on 23.12.2004 while holding the post of Gram Sewak in Panchayat Samiti Siwana District Barmer.2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that despite of the fact that she is widow of a substantive Government servant and made a requisite application the respondents have not accorded her appointment under the Rajas than Compassionate Appointment of Dependants of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1996').3. The factual matrix, necessary for adjudication of this petition for writ, is that Late Shri Samrath Singh, husband of the petitioner entered in services of Gram Panchayat Samdari w.e.f. 22.07.1994 being appointed as Octroi Guard and his services stood regularised under an order dated 15.11.1995 w.e.f. 22.07.1994. On abolition of the octroi Shri Samrath Singh was declared surplus in the, services of Gram Panchayat Samdari and was absorbed as Gram Sewak in the serv...
United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Anita and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2560
Manak Mohta, J.1. These five misc. appeals alongwith cross- objection in Appeal No. 107/97 have arisen out of a single accident, for which, Claim Cases Nos. 178/94, 191/94, 168/94 and 13/95 were preferred by the respective parties before the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dungarpur who vide his judgment and award dated 16.9.1996 decided the claim petitions. Since, in all these appeals, common questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, the same are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a Claim Petition No. 178/94 was moved by Smt. Anita Jain w/o Shri Virendra Jain (deceased), Claim Petition No. 191/94 was filed by Smt. Kamla Bai w/o Shri Ratan Lal (deceased), Claim Petition No. 168/94 was filed by Smt. Tara (injured) and Claim Petition No. 13/95 was filed by Nathu (father of deceased Raman) wherein it was stated that on 18.4.1994, Smt. Tara, Shanker, Virendra, Ratanlal and Raman were travelling in a...
Chhitar Lal @ Sita Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj1527
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Chhitar Lal @ Sita Ram and Madan Lal, the appellants herein, were put to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Jhalawar, who vide judgment dated April 9, 2002 convicted and sentenced them as under:Chhitar Lal @ Sita Ram Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Under Section 307/34 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and Fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Under Section 326/34 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Under Section 324/34 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Madan Lal:Under Section 302/34 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Babulal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ999
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. Though listed for the final orders on stay application, at the request of learned Counsel for the parties and in view of short question involved, the matter has been heard finally.2. This is insurer's appeal against the award dated 18.10.2004 made by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nimbahera in Claim Case No. 106 of 1993 particularly questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.3. Brief facts relevant for determination of the questions involved in this case are that Rami, aged 23 years, wife of Babulal, claimant-respondent No. 1, was hit and crushed by the offending truck bearing registration No. RJC 1655 on 8.12.1988 at 3.30 p.m. near Hoda Circle, District Chittorgarh. Claimant, husband of deceased, made application seeking compensation on account of accidental death of his wife. The proceedings against driver of the truck were dropped on his death; the owner of the vehicle remained ex parte and insurer contested the matter. Claimant examine...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hissaria Bros.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-2006
Reported in: (2007)211CTR(Raj)156; [2007]291ITR244(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. These appeals arise from a common order passed by the Tribunal by which 12 appeals, 6 by the assessee and 6 by the Revenue, were decided by a common order and the 12 appeals detailed above have arisen out of that common order relating to the different assessment years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96.3. While admitting the appeals, the following questions have been framed as substantial questions of law inviting consideration in these appeals:1. Whether, on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the penalty proceedings and the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 271D are vitiated being time-barred by virtue of the provisions of Section 275(1)(c) of the Act held to be applicable whereas the case of the assessee is covered under Section 275(1)(a) of the Act since the penalty proceedings pertained to the assessment order under appeal an...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »