Rajasthan Court October 2007 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.
Fateh Lal Vs. Bhagwati Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1022
Sangeet Lodha, J.1. This appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 23rd August, 1989 passed by District Judge, Udaipur in Civil Suit No. 60/1984, whereby the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,930/- preferred by the plaintiff-appellant, has been decreed to the extent of Rs. 6,120.40. The plaintiff-appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court denying the relief to the extent of principal amount Rs. 7,797.40 plus interest thereon.2. The plaintiff-appellant and the defendant-respondent both are businessmen, engaged inter-alia in the business of sale and purchase of cotton seeds. The account between the plaintiff and the respondent was settled. After due adjustment outstanding balance was struck and as on 18th July, 1981 an amount of Rs. 12,000/- was found outstanding against the defendant, which was duly acknowledged by the defendant putting his signature at the foot of the account stated. It was agreed upon between the parties that defe...
Municipal Council Vs. Dr. Shridhar Sharma and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1128
Sangeet Lodha, J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.8.1989 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Sriganganagar in Civil Suit No. 102/1985, whereby, the suit preferred by the plaintiff Dr. Shridhar Sharma (respondent in appeal No. 119/1989 and appellant in appeal No. 141/1989 herein) for compensation quantified at Rs. 15,000/-, has been decreed to the extent of Rs. 7,500/- against the defendant Municipal Council, Sriganganagar (appellant in appeal No. 119/1989 and respondent in Appeal No. 141/1989 herein). The plaintiff is aggrieved by the judgment and decree to the extent its claim for compensation has been disallowed and so also by award of the interest @ 6% from the date of the filing of the suit till the recovery of the amount, instead of 10% claimed by him. The defendant has preferred the appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court whereby, the decree for payment of compensation to the tune of Rs...
Ram Prakash Agarwal Vs. Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-25-2007
Reported in: (2008)IILLJ45Raj
G.K. Vyas, J.1. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for directions to the respondents to make payment of gratuity plus remaining salary to the tune of Rs. 1,75,550. Further, he has prayed for interest on due amount at the rate of 24% per annum w.e.f. April 30, 1993 as well as Rs. 50,000/- for harassment suffered by him due to non-payment of his dues.2. According to the facts of the case mentioned in the writ petition, the petitioner was employed with the respondent-Bank on December 1, 1959 and he continued in service and ultimately after rendering services of 33 years and four months, he was superannuated on March 31, 1993. According to the petitioner before retirement, he submitted requisite form demanding gratuity under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Gratuity Rules. However, no payment of gratuity was made to the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner's salary was Rs. 2190/- plus clearness allowance at the time of his retirement, therefor...
Jagram Vishnoi Vs. District Supply Officer and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN237
Sangeet Lodha, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of order dt. 23.01.2006 issued by the respondent No. 1 District Supply Officer, Barmer, whereby respondent No. 2 Shri Sukharam has been allotted fair price shop for village Shobhala Darshan, District Barmer.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of present writ petition are that on 11.04.2005, a notification was issued by the District Supply Officer, Barmer, for allotment of fair price shop inter alia in village Shobhala Darshan. In pursuance of the said notification, the Shobhala Darshan Gram Seva Sahkari Samiti Ltd. represented by the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 Shri Sukh Ram and one Shri Gula Ram applied for allotment of fair price shop in accordance with the procedure laid down. The applications for allotment of the shop were considered by Allotment Advisory Committee presided over by the District Supply Officer, Barmer in its meeting held on 20.05.2005. A perusal of the minutes placed on rec...
Aishwarya College of Education Sansthan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1432
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner Aishwarya College of Education Sansthan inter alia challenging the order of cancellation of allotment of land to the petitioner society, a society registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'petitioner society').3. The case set up by the petitioner society is that the respondent Urban Improvement Trust, Udaipur (UIT, for short) was initially allotted the land measuring 10,000 Sq. Meters at reserve price of Rs. 60 per Sq. feet in Bhuvana Chittrakut Extension Plan as a result of application of the petitioner for allotting 20,000 sq. meters and upon a representation made in this regard, the respondent UIT allotted 20,000 sq. meters to the petitioner society vide communication dated 19.9.2003. The petitioner society runs an educational institution in Udaipur. and had requested for allotment of land in question...
Vijay Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1202
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant, along with 13 co-accused, was put to trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Ajmer, who vide judgment dated July 15, 2004 while acquitting co-accused persons convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for ten days.2. It is the prosecution case that on July 2, 2000 informant Dev Bahadur (P.W.4) submitted a written report (Ex.P/4) at Police Station Christianganj Ajmer to the effect that on the said day around 10-10.30 a.m. while the informant along with the his brother Suresh Bahadur, Bhagwan Chand, Raju and Bhaskar were clearing the place in front of the College behind Roadways booking by removing Babool trees, for the purpose of installing a Cabin, Vijay Singh, Jai Singh, Surendra Singh, Gopal Singh (Annu), Dilip, Ram Swaroop, Praveen, Pintu, Naresh, Nikki, Banwari, Shyama, Gordhan Kumar, Chandu and two...
Gangotri Enterprises Limited Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN376
Manak Mohta, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties in respect of application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of Arbitrator.2. It is stated by learned Counsel for the applicant that applicant is a Limited Company incorporated under Indian Companies Act, 1956 and is carrying on the business of contract or ship. The applicant was awarded contract by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Pali (Raj.) for the 'construction of Bandi Nehra Irrigation Project Tehsil and District Pali' vide work-order No. Acctts/Bandi/Nehra/97-98/11091-101 dt. 10.02.1998. The said work was to be started from 01.12.1997 and was to be completed by 30.11.1999 (24 months period including rainy season). The contract was for an amount of Rs. 3,05,20,647/- and an Agreement No. 131/1997-98 (Annex. A/1) was also executed in this respect between the parties having arbitration clause that in case of any sort of dispute, the dispute was liable to be referred ...
Munna Lal Sharma Vs. the Managing Director, R.S.R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1205
R.M. Lodha, J.1. This reference, in a group of 19 writ petitions, in the opinion of the Single Judge, became necessary because of two conflicting decisions viz., (one) Bhagwan Singh v. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (D.B. Special Appeal No. 1/2001, decided by the Division Bench on 20.11.2001) and (two) Jugal Kishore v. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (D.B. Special Appeal No. 2996/2006, decided by another Division Bench on 10th May, 2006).2. The Single Judge in the referral order observed thus:Having carefully pondered over the judgments of division bench rendered earlier in Bhagwan singh v. R.S.R.T.C. (supra) and later in Jugal Kishore v. R.S.R.T.C. (supra) I find that they are in clear conflict and what has been observed in earlier D.B. Judgment has not been countenanced in latter D.B. judgment, ibid.3. The facts being identical in all the writ petitions, to avoid multiplicity of facts and for the sake of brevity, we shall refer to the facts obtaining in the cas...
Ramnarayan Joshi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1058
Dinesh Maheshwari, J. 1. The petitioner, while stating his date of birth as 10.02.1940, entered the government service as Patwari on 15.03.1963 but continued till 01.05.2001 when the Collector Chittorgarh terminated his service after noticing that his date of birth was unauthorisedly changed in the service record to 10.02.1944, has preferred the instant petition for writ assailing the order passed by the Collector, Chittorgarh in departmental proceedings on 25.05.2002 (Annex.9) directing adjustment of the amount unauthorisedly received by the petitioner beyond the age of superannuation, from 01.03.1998 to 01.05.2001; and that passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Udaipur on 29.06.2004 (Annex.13) rejecting his appeal. 2. Factual matrix relevant for the present petition, as available from the material placed on record and more or less of undenied and undeniable facts, could be taken into comprehension thus: The petitioner entered into the services on being appointed as Patwai on 15th Ma...
Shri Ganga Jubli Pinjraprol Gaushala Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)WLN236
Govind Mathur, J.1. The District of Nagaur is situated in Thar Desert and is mainly having rural population scattered in hamlets with average density of 127 persons per square kilometer. The entire district is having no perennial river and water supply mainly dependent on ground water, that is also saline and unpotable. In few pockets potable water at the depth of about 120 meters (about 450 feet) is available but that too is deteriorating due to intrusion of saline water from the adjoining saline zones and, therefore, fluoride contents continuously increasing. Entire district of Nagaur is declared as dark zone due to continues fall of underground water. The district is having about 9000 tube wells, that is highest in a single district in entire sate and due to excessive use of underground water, its table is lowering down with high speed. Looking to all these conditions, Division Bench of this Court acting upon a letter (D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 628/2004, Govind Ram v. State...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »