Rajasthan Court August 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.
Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: (2007)IIILLJ275Raj; RLW2007(2)Raj1602
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in this petition is to Clause (iii) of para 7 of the Explanation in Notification No. 514 (E) dated July 12, 1994 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour in purported exercise of powers conferred by Section 3(i)(b) read with Section 4(1)(iii) and 5(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (for short '1948 Act')- Sum and substance of the contentions raised in the writ petition is that the inclusion sought to be made was impermissible in the back ground of what has been stated in the Mines Act, the Mines Rules and other pieces of legislation dealing with mining activities. The relevant portion of the Notification reads thus:Explanation for the purpose of Notification:7. A person working or employed in or in connection with a mine is said to be working or employed 'below ground' if he is working or employed:(i) in a shaft which has been or is in the course of being sunk; or (ii) in any excavation which extends below superjacent ground; or(iii) in an...
Moorti Shri Adeshwar Bhagwan JaIn Swetamber Mandir Vs. Shimbhunath Sin ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj46; RLW2007(1)Raj731
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties.2. The plaintiff-appellant filed a Civil Suit No. 269/66 (50/76) for declaration and permanent injunction in the lower Court in respect of the property, in dispute, which was decreed by the Court of Additional Munsif No. 2, Bharatpur, (for short, 'the lower Court') vide its judgment and decree dated 10-5-1977. Being aggrieved with the same, an appeal was preferred by the defendant before the District Judge, Bharatpur, which was transferred for its decision to the Additional District Judge No. 1, Bharatpur (for short, 'the first appellate Court'). The first appellate Court vide its judgment dated 24-4-1984 allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the lower Court. Hence, this second appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff.3. This Court, vide its order dated 31-10-1985, admitted this second appeal and formulated the following substantial questions of law:(i) Whether the learned Judge misconst...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj75; RLW2007(1)Raj763
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Heard rival submissions.2. The State of Rajasthan, petitioner herein, seeks to quash the order dated April 11,1990 of the Central Government passed in Revision Application No. 2/20/25/87-MV whereby the petitioner was directed to grant prospecting licence to respondent company for the area reserved by the petitioner for exploration and exploitation of SMS limestone. Operative part of the impugned order reads as under:Considering all facts and evidence on record and submissions made, we are inclined to hold that rejection of the P.L. application of the petitioner company on the ground that the impugned area has been reserved for exploration and exploitation of SMS limestone by the State Government is bad and cannot be sustained. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the State Government with the direction to grant prospecting licence to petitioner company for the impugned area. In case the total area held by the company under P.L. be...
Vijay Kumar Vs. State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj720
Harbans Lal, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of the FIR No. 151/1989 as well as the order dated 4.2.1997 taking cognizance against the petitioner for offence under Section 379 IPC.2. The instant petition has arisen in the following circumstances:3. Plot No. G-9 measuring about 1210 sq. meters situated in industrial area was allotted by the RIICO to Shri Ramavtar Kamdar non-petitioner No.2 on 14.2.1977 but he failed to comply with the terms and conditions of allotment whereupon the said allotment was cancelled and the plot in question was allotted to the wife of the petitioner on 20.2.1988. Thereafter, non-petitioner No. 2 filed a suit in the court of learned Additional Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Jaipur, Kishangarh which was returned for filing the same in the proper court. Thereafter, non-petitioner No. 2 filed a fresh suit in the court of Additional District @ Sessions Judge, No. 6, Jaipur City, Jaipur on 13.8.1991 along with the application of tempora...
Shri Pooran Industries and Oil Mills and Anr. Vs. Suvina's Enterprises ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj47
ORDERK.C. Sharma, J.1. The plaintiffs filed a money suit against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,39,000/-. The defendants in their written statements filed a counterclaim, thereby claiming a sum of Rs. 1,26,000/- from the plaintiff appellants. The learned trial Court, at the conclusion of trial, dismissed the plaintiffs' suit and decreed the defendants' counter-claim against the plaintiffs for a sum of Rs. 91830/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. With effect from 19-10-2000 on which the notice Ex. 12 was issued, till filing of the written statement and @ 12% p.a. after filing of written statement till realisation of the amount.2. The plaintiff-appellants challenged the above judgment and decree dated 5-3-2000 of filing first appeal before this Court, with the prayer that plaintiffs' suit be decreed and the counter claim of the defendants be dismissed with costs throughout.3. During pendency of the appeal, the defendant-respondents have filed an application under Order 7, Ru...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Praksh Pulverising Mills Pvt. ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-22-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3212
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Machiavelli in his noted work, 'The Prince' said, 'It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, not more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things.'2. A case of Marine Insurance in desserts of Rajasthan evoked initial attraction of this Court but when the facts in a marshalled manner were shipped on the board of this Court, it revealed that respondent plaintiff M/s. Prakash Pulverising Mills Private Ltd. Company, imported 1600 bags of P.G. Red Oxide from M/s. Abdul Raza Jalaly of Bandar Abbas (Iran) for being transshipped from Iran to Mumbai and then were to be transported from Mumbai to Alwar in Rajasthan in the fateful ship 'Naran Pasa' under its captain Qadir Hussan.3. A little more dive into the sea of facts would be appropriate to decide this first appeal arising out of Civil Original Suit No. 89/77 decreed in favour of plaintiff by the court of Shri S.R.Singh Bajwa, ADJ No. 1, Jaipur ...
V.V. Dixit Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3292
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 3.10.97 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal in appeal No. 159/95 whereby the Tribunal vide its order dated 3.10.97 has allowed the appeal of the respondent No. 2 and directed to promote him on the post of Joint Registrar against the vacancy of 1987-88 in the category of merit and the promotion given to the petitioner was set aside and in place of the petitioner, respondent No. 2 was given promotion on the post of Joint Registrar.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on 28.2.97 as deputy Registrar on urgent temporary basis and was later on selected by the Departmental Promotion Committee and was regularly appointed as Deputy Registrar on 26.2.81 and was thereafter confirmed on this post.3. The seniority list of confirmed Deputy Registrars was published vide order dated 20.7.85 as on 15.7.85 and in this seniority list the name of the petitioner was shown at No. 32.4. Th...
N.L.P. Organics Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Rajasthan Financial Corporation
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj10; RLW2007(2)Raj865
ORDERR.S. Chauhan, J.1. The repayment of loan of Rs. 1,36,04,491/- by the Appellants, M/s. N.L.P. Organics Pvt. Ltd. to the Rajasthan Financial Corporation (henceforth to be referred to as the Respondent, for short) along with an interest of 15% per annum forms the background of this appeal. The Appellants are challenging the Order dated 23-11-2004 passed by' the Additional District Judge No. 1, Alwar whereby the learned Judge has allowed the application filed by the Respondent under Section 31 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (henceforth to be referred to as the Act of 1951, for short) and has directed the Appellants to pay the abovementioned amount at the abovementioned rate of interest.2. The Appellants applied for a loan of Rs. 40.28 Lakhs (revised to Rs. 30.90 Lakhs) to the Respondent. Vide Order dated 13-2-1987, the Respondent sanctioned a loan of only Rs. 30,90,000/- for the industrial project at Bhiwadi for the manufacturing of drugs and drug formulation. It was ag...
Bhushan Prakash @ Prasad Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3415
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The complainant-petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.8.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bassi, District Jaipur wherein after recording the statement of the complainant, the learned Magistrate has sent the case for further investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., to the Station House Officer, Police Station Kanota instead of taking cognizance for offence under Section 395, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC.2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant is a driver by profession. He purchased a Tata 407, 21 Seater Mini-Bus having Registration No. RJ-12P0485, 1996 Model bearing, Chassis No. 357012 JTQ 835792, Engine No. 497 SP 21 JTQ 806310 from the accused Shamshuddin vide agreement to sale dated 28.2.2004. The accused Shamshuddin and his agent, the accused Kailash Chandra Sharma, assured him that they would get the vehicle financed. For this purpose the complainant gave Rs. 36,000/-to Shamshuddin and Rs. 5,000/- to Kailash ...
Niranjan Lal Vs. U.i.T. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj18; RLW2007(1)Raj350
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. Running from Court to Court for almost thirty years, trying to save his four shops and two staircases, the appellant has challenged the order dated 18-9-1988 passed by the Additional District Judge, No. 2 Alwar whereby the learned Judge has accepted the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 30-9-1993 passed by the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 3 and has remanded the case back to the learned trial Court. The appellant as the plaintiff in the case is, hence, forced to face a de novo trial even after the lapse of almost thirty years. His ordeal is unending, his patience is frayed, his faith in the judiciary is shaken.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 21-3-1977, the appellant-plaintiff, Niranjan Lal had filed a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction against the UIT. In the plaint, the appellant had pleaded that plot of land measuring 30 x 120 situated at Station Road, Mangal Marg, Alwar was originally owned by one Shiv Lal Singh, a ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »