Rajasthan Court November 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.
Sant Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1187; RLW2008(1)Raj630
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this revision petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 4.11.2006 passed by the Addl. Chief Judl. Magistrate, Suratgarh in Criminal Complaint Case No. 102/2006. It is prayed that the said order may be declared illegal and the police may be directed to re-investigate the matter.2. As per facts of this case, a soldier namely Kamlesh, permanent resident of Nohar (District Hanumangarh) was married to Suman d/o Lekh Ram. He was posted at the relevant time in Jammu & Kashmir and had come home on leave. It is revealed from the facts of the case that there was some dispute in between Kamlesh and his wife Suman and her family members. Petitioner Sant Lal, father of Kamlesh, is said to have tried to settle the matter. In the course of events, Kamlesh filed an application under Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights; and, on 26th February, 2006 when he had come home on leave, Kamlesh went to his in-laws house at Suratgarh for the purpo...
Executive Engineer Prs Irrigation Department, Rawatbhata and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN438
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. A suit for permanent, prohibitory and mandatory injunction was filed by the plaintiffs in the trial Court in the year 1982, which was decreed by the trial Court on 14.11.1982. The plaintiffs' case was that the property in dispute was allotted to one Gangabai on 26.12.1973. This property was purchased by one Murad Begam (now deceased)-the mother of the plaintiffs. When the defendants-appellants tried to raise a wall on the portion of the property of the plaintiffs, then they filed the suit for injunction seeking mandatory injunction for removal of the wall.3. The defendants-appellants submitted that the area in question was declared as protected area and for that purpose, a notification was issued on 30.01.1974. The allotment order of the year 1973 referred above was cancelled on 06.04.1974. In view of the above, neither Murad Begam nor the plaintiffs could have acquired any title to the property. It is also submitted that app...
Union of India (Uoi) Through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs V ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-02-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR914]; RLW2008(2)Raj1605
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 14th February, 1997 allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent and directing the appellants to determine and release the pension payable to the petitioner on his dismissal from service.3. The brief facts necessary for the present purposes are that the petitioner was recruited as Constable in the Border Security Force on 27.8.1974 and was later on posted as Constable Nursing Assistant during the year 1984.4. He was charged under Section 40 of the Border Security Force Act vide charge sheet dated 14.12.1994 and after he was tried by Summery Security Force Court, he was found guilty and penalty of dismissal from service was imposed.5. Section 48 of the B.S.F. Act provides punishment which may be inflicted in respect of offence committed by the persons subject to B.S.F. Act and convicted by Security Force Court. The various punishments which can be imp...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Budhi Prakash and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-02-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1740; RLW2008(2)Raj946
Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.1. This appeal by the State of Rajasthan arises out of the judgment and order dated October 11, 1982 passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Cases, Jaipur, by which the learned Judge has acquitted the accused respondents of the offences charged with.2. The facts leading to this appeal on 18.1.1979, PW2 Rafiq Ahmed submitted an application, Ex. P.2 before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Department, Sawaimadhopur stating that some Government employee has demanded bribe of Rs. 40/- for getting prepared a map from Municipal Board, Sawaimadhopur. Again on 20.1.1979, he submitted a written report, Ex. P.3 before the same Officer of the Anti Corruption Department. Having received the report, the Dy. Superintendent of Police summoned two motbirs namely PW3 Laxmi Narain and PW4 Ram Singh and in their presence, the complainant gave currency notes of Rs. 25/- (two notes of Rs. 10/- and one note of Rs. 5/-) to the Dy. Superintendent of Pol...
R.S.R.T.C. and ors. Vs. Bhagwati Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-02-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1142
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 7.2.1996 (Annexure-4) passed by Judge, Labour Court, Bhilwara on application filed under Section 33-C(2) of industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by the respondent-workman.2. According to the facts inter-alia narrated in the writ petition, an award dated 16.2.1993 was passed by Judge, Labour Court, Bhilwara whereby termination of the respondent workman was set aside and he was ordered to be reinstated upon the post on which he was working on 7.6.1979 and further passed an order for continuity of service but no backwages were allowed. The Judge, Labour Court allowed Rs. 5000/- as compensation to the workman.3. The award passed by Judge, Labour Court on 16.2.1993 was published in official gazette on 16.4.1993. Against the said award, a writ petition was preferred before this Court and the same was registered as SB Civil writ Petition No. 3930/1993.It is mentioned in the writ petitio...
Rai Singh Bissu Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-02-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)WLN73
Rajesh Balia, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge rejecting the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the adverse entries in the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner appellant for the year 1991 in which all the columns have been filled as unsatisfactory by the reporting Officer.2. We find that though the adverse ACR pertains to year 1991, the communication has been made as late as vide communication dt. 17.09.1999 which militates against the efficacy of such entries as it deprives the person concerned of effective right to represent against the adverse entry in confidential report. Apart from the material placed by the respondents as Annex. R/4 it appears that these entries were recorded in the year 1991 as a result of some complaint made by Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh vide his letter dt. 09.01.1992 concerning the negligent discharge of functioning by the appellant-petitioner on the various fields of h...
LR's of Smt. Sire Kanwar Maloo Vs. Shri Daudas Mantri
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Raj13; RLW2008(1)Raj681
Bhagwati Prasad, J.1. We are seized of the matter as a refree court. The reference as made is in the subject matter of the decision in a first appeal. The matter of Smt. Sire Kanwar Maloo v. Daudas Mantri came before the learned Single Judge. After examining the case, he was of the opinion that the following question is involved in the appeal:Whether co-owner of a wall situated between the two adjacent immovable properties, are co-sharers within the meaning of Section 2 (1) of the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act, 1966, read with other Provisions of the Act so as to give right to the co-owner of the party - wall to pre-empt the transfer of other immovable property under Section 6(1) of the Act. 2. Regarding this question the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that there exists an apparent diversity of opinion in the decisions of this Court in the matter of Jagan Nath v. Radheshyam and Anr. reported in, ILR (1960) 75 and a later decision in the matter of Dharam Pal v. Smt. Kaushalya Devi ...
NitIn Saini Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj936
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The complainant-Tripti Saini moved this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for recalling/setting aside the order dated 31.5.2007 passed by this Court in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 528/2007 (Nitin Saini v. State of Rajasthan) by which the arrest warrant issued against the accused-petitioner Nitin Saini was converted into bailable warrant.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant-Tripti Saini solemnized marriage with accused-petitioner on 8.12.2004 but since the date of marriage and prior to it there was constant demands of dowry on the part of the petitioner and his family members. The applicant was harassed and humiliated by the non-petitioner and his family members.3. On 7.9.2006 the complainant lodged a FIR at Police Station - Jaipur City, Mahila Thana (South) against the petitioner and Vimla Saini, Ramesh Saini and Vinti Saini and others. On the report submitted by the applicant, the FIR No. 68/2006 has been registered under Sec...
Lrs. of Jamil Ahmed Vs. R.S.E.B. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN454
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner late Jameel Ahmed has challenged the impugned order dt. 04.03.1994 (Annex.-7) whereby LRs. of the regular pay-scale allowed to the petitioner Late Jameel Ahmed on the post of Blacksmith w.e.f. 01.04.1974 was withdrawn and he was ordered to be fixed in the pay-scale No. 1 only.2. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner Jameel Ahmed died on 04.02.2007. Thereafter an application was moved by legal heirs of late Jameel Ahmed for bringing them on record. Vide order dt. 06.08.2007, the legal heirs of the petitioner late Jameel Ahmed were taken on record and amended cause-title has been filed in this case.3. According to the facts inter alia narrated in the writ petition, late Jameel Ahmed was initially appointed in the month of January, 1971 vide Annex.-1 at the rate of Rs. 5/- per day and since his appointment late Jameel Ahmed was doing the job of welding in the respondent Board. Number of persons who were work...
Bahadur Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj998
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 23.02.1994 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Churu whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service from the post of Constable in the Police Department as well as enquiry report dated 30.01.1993 of the Enquiry Officer (Dy. S.P., Churu) and so also order passed by the appellate authority, Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bikaner Range, Bikaner dated 14.03.1995 and the order passed by the Reviewing Authority dated 19.02.1996 whereby the order of termination passed by the Superintendent of Police, Churu was upheld.2. According to the facts narrated in the petition, the petitioner was substantively working on the post of Constable in the Police Department. Initially he was appointed on 01.01.1985. It is indicated in the petition that the petitioner along with two other persons was charged for theft under Sections 379 and 411, I.P.C. and an FIR was lodged bearing No. 89/1991 on 25.05.1991 at ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »