Rajasthan Court September 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.
Mewa Ram Alias Mewa Singh and Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-19-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ522
ORDERH.R. Panwar, J.1. By these criminal miscellaneous petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code' hereinafter),the petitioners have assailed the orders dated 10-1-2006 passed by the Aditional Sessions Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar (for short, 'the Revisional Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Revision Nos. 67/2005 and 28/2005 respectively, whereby the revision petitions filed by the petitioners against the order dated 13-12-2004 passed by the Chif Judicial Magistrate Sri Ganganagar (for short, 'the trial Court' hereinafter), were dismissed.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Carefully gone through the orders passed by the trial Court as well as the Revisional Court.3. A complaint was lodged by non-petitioner No. 2 Roshan Lal Kataria against the present petitioners and one Mahendra alleging therein that they are doing business in the name and style of 'Nova Refrigeration Industry' and co-accused Mahendra and petitioner Sudheer Aror...
Kavita Choudhary (Smt.) Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj478; 2007(2)SLJ367(Raj)
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner applied for appointment on the post of Physical Teacher Grade HI pursuant to the advertisement dated 28th July, 2003. He is a candidate belonging to Other Backward Classes (O.B.C.). He secured 76.76% marks as per the merit list prepared by the respondents. According to the petitioner benefit of reservation is provided to candidates belonging to reserved category in order to avoid their competition with general candidates. Only if they are not able to come in the merit against open and unreserved seats, they can be considered for appointment according to their merit placement in particular reserved category. The respondents by misapplying the law governing implementation of rule of reservation have appointed candidates with lesser merit than the petitioner in open category. As against the petitioner's merit of 76.76%, the respondents have appointed one Ms. Durgesh Nandini in the general category having 76.34% marks and an...
Hindustan Zinc. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Radhey Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3396; 2007(2)SLJ374(Raj)
S.N. Jha, C.J.1. This special appeal is directed against an order by which, allowing the writ petition of the respondent, the learned Single Judge directed the appellants to treat the period of respondent's absence on account of incarceration in a criminal case on duty and pay him full emoluments including consequential benefits of increments, seniority etc.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent was appointed in the service of the appellant Hindustan Zinc Ltd. as Helper some time in 1973. On 20.9.1984 he was arrested in connection with a criminal case registered at Dabok Police Station under Section 302, 307 etc. of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court convicted him under Section 307 of the code and awarded sentence of 5 years rigorous imprisonment and fine on 23.8.1989. On appeal he was acquitted by this Court on 9.10.1990. On 26.103.1990, the respondent filed application to take him in employment. On 14.12.1990 he filed another application and on 24.12.1990 order was pa...
Radhey Shyam Vs. Mst. Pappi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Raj42
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal is against the divorce decree dated 13-2-2002 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge No. 2, Chittorgarh in Divorce Case No. 14/98. The trial Court dismissed the divorce petition on the ground that the appellant-applicant sought divorce on the ground of, respondents living adulterous life but the appellant-applicant did not implead the person against whom, according to the applicant, the respondent had illicit relations.3. It will be worthwhile to mention here that in the trial Court, the applicant-appellant prayed for DNA test of the appellant and his wife-respondent and respondent's son Chiku which was allowed by the trial Court vide order dated 2-8-2000 because the respondent also gave her consent for the DNA test of herself and her son. A letter was issued by the Court to the Centre for DNA Finger-printing and Diagnostics, which is an autonomous Centre of the Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Sc...
Keshav Dass and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj542
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Challenge in these two appeal is to the judgment dated November 30, 2000 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge Kishangarh (Ajmer) whereby the four appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:Raju Ram @ Raju:Under Section 120B IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 302/34 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and Tine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 364 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 394 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Ranjit, Ramesh and Keshav Das:Under Section 120B IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in def...
Official Liquidator of Shubh Laxmi Savings and Finance P. Ltd. (In Liq ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: [2007]135CompCas547(Raj); [2007]77SCL107(Raj)
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. By way of judge's summons taken out under Section 543 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') the official liquidator has prayed for an order:(i) the non-petitioners be held to be liable jointly and severally and they be directed to restore immediately the money and other properties, assets, actionable claims of the company in liquidation, as appearing in the balance-sheet dated June 30, 1981, amounting to Rs. 11,96,091 forthwith to the official liquidator along with interest and other relief in the form of damages as the hon'ble court may deem just, proper and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the present case ;(ii) the non-petitioners be further directed to contribute such sum to the assets of the company in liquidation by way of compensation as may be thought fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case ; (iii) the non petitioners be further directed to immediately restore to the official liquidator the properties and a...
Official Liquidator of Shubh Laxmi Saving and Finance P. Ltd. (In Liqu ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: [2007]135CompCas512(Raj); [2007]75SCL458(Raj)
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. By way of judge's summons taken out under Section 454(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') the official liquidator has prayed for an order to punish non-petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 for committing the offence under Section 454 of the Act and to direct the non-petitioners to hand over the records of the company in liquidation to the official liquidator.2. The contextual facts depict that M/s. Shubh Laxmi Savings and Finance Pvt. Ltd. having its head office at Gopalji ka Rasta, Johari Bazar, Jaipur and branch office at Naya Bazar, Ajmer, Gumanpura Choraha Kota, Jalori Gate, Jodhpur and Alakh Sagar Road, Bikaner, was directed to be wound up vide order dated May 5, 1989. The non-petitioners Brij Mohan Gogna and Dhanna Lal Sharma were ex-directors of the company. The official liquidator was required to take all proceedings for winding up as per the provisions of the Act to take charge of all the properties and assets of the said company. The ex-directors o...
Reshma Khatwani (Smt.) Vs. Saraogi Mansion Estate Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj116
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The Contest between the landlord and the tenant over the payment provisional rent has raised an interesting legal issue : whether determining the provisional rent under Section 7 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) ct, 1950 (henceforth to be referred to as 'the Act', for short), the court has the power to direct the payment of the said rent from the date of filing of the application under Section 6 of the act or not?2. The appellant is challenging the order dated 9.12.2003, passed by the Additional District Judge, No. 8, Jaipur whereby the learned Judge has fixed the provisional rent of the shop at Rs. 5,500/- per month and has directed the appellant to pay the said amount to the respondent from 17.4.2001, the date of the filing of the suit under Section 6 of the Act.3. The brief facts of the case are that the landlord, the respondent before this court, had filed a suit under Section 6 for fixation of standard rent for the shop rented by the appe...
Om Prakash Taneja Vs. Saraogi Mansion Estate Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj78
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The dispute over the determination of the provisional rent and its payment by the tenant to the landlord has raised an interesting legal issue: whether while determining the provisional rent under Section 7 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (henceforth to be referred to as 'the Act', for short), the court has the power to direct the payment of the said rent from the date of filing of the application under Section 6 of the Act or not?2. The appellant is challenging the Order dated 9.12.2003, passed by the Additional District Judge, No. 8, Jaipur, whereby the learned Judge has fixed the provisional rent of the showroom at Rs. 57,500/- per month and has directed the appellant to pay the said amount to the respondent from 16.4.2001, the date of the filing of the suit under Section 6 of the Act.3. The brief facts of the case are that the landlord, the respondent before this Court, had filed a suit under Section 6 for fixation of standard r...
Gordhan Lal Vs. Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2006
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj179
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The short controversy involved in this writ petition is that the land belonging to the petitioner has been acquired by the respondent No. 1, RIICO, for the respondent No. 2, Indian Oil Corporation.2. It is alleged that assurance was given by the RIICO to provide employment to the petitioner and to this effect, RIICO has recommended the case of the petitioner to the Indian Oil Corporation to provide him employment as on account of acquisition of the property belonging to the petitioner, livelihood of the petitioner has been taken away, therefore, to provide him employment, his case was recommended.3. Since then in spite of repeated request to the Indian Oil Corporation, no employment was provided to the petitioner therefore, this writ petition.4. Learned Counsel appearing for the RIICO submits that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 4630/95 Smt. Lad Kanwar v. State and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »