Rajasthan Court February 2007 Judgments
Anand Kumar Parashar and 25 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN385
R.C. Gandhi, J.1. These petitions involve common questions of facts and law for determination and are being decided by this common order.2. The petitioners seek issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint them pursuant to their selections to the posts of Primary Teachers against primary Teachers Examination-2004 and further direction to the State/respondent not to send any requisition to the Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as the Commission') to fill up the posts.3. The respondent/Commission issued Advertisement Notice dt. 02.06.2004 inviting applications from desirous candidates seeking consideration for selection and appointment to the posts of Primary Teachers. The petitioners, being eligible, applied for the posts.4. The Commission advertised 25,712 posts. Subsequently, these posts were increased to 35,712. The petitioners appeared in the Examination and were declared selected. The result of the examination was declared on 1...
Tag this Judgment!Roop Shanker (Died) and ors. Vs. Smt. Shashi Bala and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2551
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. A suit for partition was filed by one Smt. Shashibala widow of Pramod Shanker in the year 1973 in the Court of District Judge, Bikaner being civil original suit No. 37/1973 (17/1977). According to the plaintiff Smt. Shashibala, defendant No. 1 Roop Shanker - father-in-law of plaintiff Shashibala, inherited certain properties which were never partitioned. The husband of plaintiff died on 2.9.1967. According to the plaintiff, since she got share in the property, which is in possession of her fatherin-law Roop Shanker, therefore, she is entitled to claim share in the property and according to the plaintiff, since her husband had half share in the entire properties, therefore, she is entitled to half share in the properties which are in the hands of defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 2 - Smt. Premvati was impleaded as party as she was second wife of defendant No. 1 Roop Shanker thereby step mother-in-law of plaintiff.3. Both the defe...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Lal and anr. Vs. Dwarka Prasad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Raj129; RLW2007(3)Raj2656
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Two important questions of law arise for consideration in the present. first appeal and on this arguments of not only learned Counsel for the appellants and respondents were heard by this Court at length, but besides that learned Counsel appearing in other cases involving same question, also addressed the Court in the present appeal as Amicus Curiae and they were heard at length.The questions are1) Whether after enactment of the Seeuritisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, ('Securitisatlon Act' for brief), with effect from 1742-2002 which contains a bar against exercise of Jurisdiction by Civil Courts in Section 34 of the said Act, whether the civil suit Involving the banks and financial Institutions who have taken measures Under Section 13(4) of the aforesaid Act can be filed and whether the Civil Court In civil suits filed Under Section 9 of CPC can entertain such suits for deciding Inter se rights between ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Raj Kumari Paliwal Vs. Rajasthan Financial Corporation and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Raj156; RLW2008(1)Raj504
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned single Judge dated 28-7-1994 disposing of the writ petition.2. The brief controversy is as to whether the appellant-petitioner was entitled to the exemption from payment of stamp duty on the agreement/conveyance deed executed by the Rajasthan Financial Corporation of an industrial unit in an auction held by it under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951.3. Making his submissions, learned Counsel for the appellant-petitioner relied upon Annex. 8-A, notification dated 27-1-1988 whereby the State Government in exercise of powers conferred under Section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as adapted to Rajasthan by the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952, the State Government remitted the stamp duty chargeable under the said Act 'in respect of the transfer deeds of Sick Industrial Units certified as such by a Central or State level Financial Institution of by the General Manager of the concerned District Indus...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Behari Joshi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj3201
S.N. Jha, C.J.1. This special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22.12.1995 dismissing the writ petition of the appellant. The appellant had filed the writ petition, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5492/1995, for quashing the order of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bundi dated 9.3.1993 rescinding the resolution of the Bundi Zila Sahkari Bhoorni Vikas Bank Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank') as well as the appellate order of the Additional Registrar (Appeals), Cooperative Societies, Kota dated 3.11.1995 dismissing the appeal of the appellant preferred against the said order of the Assistant Registrar.2. Facts of the case, briefly stated, are that on 7.8.1982 the appellant was appointed on a class IV post on temporary basis under resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent-Bank dated 6.8.1982. By order dated 10.8.1982 the appellant was directed to perform the duties of clerk keeping in view his academic qualificati...
Tag this Judgment!Mahaveer Oil Industries Vs. C.T.O.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj100
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is a Registered Dealer registered under the Provisions of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. For the year 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, and 1998-99 and regular assessment orders were passed on different dates. The dates and details of the above orders are not relevant because of the reason that those original assessment orders are not under challenge in these revision petitions.3. After the above assessment orders the proceedings under Section 30 of the Act of 1994, on the ground of escaped assessment were initiated against the petitioner for all these four assessment years. For this purpose notices were issued to the assessee by the Assessing Authority in the month of June 2000. Admittedly notices for initiation of proceedings under Section 30 of the Act of 1994 were within limitation as provided under Section 30(3) of the Act of 1994.Separate Assessment Orders were passed by the Asse...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Kumari Paliwal (Smt.) Vs. Rajasthan Financial Corporation and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN119
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of learned Single Judge dt. 28.07.1994 disposing of the writ petition.2. The brief controversy is as to whether the appellant-petitioner was entitled to the exemption from payment of stamp duty on the agreement/conveyance deed executed by the Rajasthan Financial Corporation of an industrial unit in an auction held by it under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951.3. Making his submissions, learned Counsel for the appellant-petitioner relied upon Annex. 8-A, notification dt. 27.01.1988 whereby the State Government in exercise of powers conferred under Section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as adapted to Rajasthan by the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952, the State Government remitted the stamp duty chargeable under the said Act 'in respect of the transfer deeds of Sick Industrial Units certified as such by a central or state level financial institution or by the General Manager of the concer...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Railway Manager Vs. Judge, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: [2007(113)FLR557]
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. Instant petitions have been filed by the petitioner-employer assailing the award passed by the learned Labour Court-cum-industrial Tribunal dated 23rd March, 2006.2. A reference made by the appropriate Government for adjudication of the dispute was as to whether both the workmen are entitled for promotional scale under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) introduced by the petitioner in terms of circular dated 20th October, 1999 (Annexure 1) which came into force with effect from the date of its publication. Both the respondents-workmen stood retired from service before reference was made, on 31st December, 2001 and on 31st January 2002 respectively.Learned Tribunal after taking into consideration the material on record, recorded a finding that both the respondents-workmen were entitled for promotional scale under the ACP Scheme introduced by the petitioner dated 20th October, 1999 and answered the reference.3. The petitioner-employer has basically assailed th...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Chhagan Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)WLN421
Gyan Sudha Mishra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant- Union of India against the order of the learned Single Judge dt. 11.08.2005 passed in SBCWP No. 5238/2004 by which the writ petition filed by the respondent-herein was allowed and the appellant herein had been directed to grant disability pension to the respondent who admittedly had served in the Indian Army and was removed from service on the ground of his disability which he had sustained while discharging the duties in the Army. The respondent had been removed from service in the year 1952 but thereafter he did not take recourse to any legal remedy for claiming pensionary benefits from the Army. However, when he attained the age of 70 years and perhaps faced financial hardship, he was compelled to file a writ petition in the High Court before the learned Single Judge which has been allowed, relying upon the ratio of the decision delivered in the matter of Smt. Emna v. Union of India reported in 2004 (1) WLC (Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. and anr. Vs. Vikas Wsp Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(2)Raj1701; [2007]78SCL62(Raj)
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioners are aggrieved against the order dated 12.1.2007 by which the trial court decided the issue No. 7 about the civil court's jurisdiction against the petitioner-defendants and held that the civil court has jurisdiction to try the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff No. 1.3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 1-plaintiff submitted an application before petitioner No. 1-Bombay Stock Exchange Limited (for short 'BSE') for listing its equity shares. In consequence thereof, ultimately an agreement was executed between plaintiff respondent No. 1 and the BSE on 18.2.1994. It is alleged that the plaintiff- respondent No. l did not comply with the certain clauses of the listing agreement, therefore, the BSE issued show cause notice to respondent No. l on 21.8.2001 and sought explanation as to why trading in the securities of the plaintiff company may not be suspended by BSE. It is alleged that even after ex...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »