Rajasthan Court May 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.
Ruda Ram and anr. Vs. Ibrahim and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj3204
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This revision is directed against the order passed by the Rajasthan WakfTribunal, Jaipur Under Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995 on an application filed by plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 7CPC and Section 151 CPC whereby the said Tribunal directed Commissioner Mr. Vasi Mohammed Ansari, Advocate to visit the disputed site and submit a factual report before the court.2. Learned Counsel for the petitionersdefendant submits that the Commissioner could not have been appointed by the Tribunal to collect the evidence. Hence this revision petition.3. The powers of revision with the High Court conferred Under Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995 are as under:83(9) No appeal shall lie against any decision or order whether interim or otherwise, given or made by the Tribunal:Provided that a High Court may, on its own motion or on the application of the Board or any person aggrieved, call for and examine the records relating to any dispute, question or other matter which has bee...
Radhey Shyam Sharma Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj3369
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.6.2006 whereby the Authorized Officer (Additional District Collector, Kota) while drawing the proceedings for the election to the officer of Vice Chairman, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Kota rejected the nomination of the petitioner for election to the aforesaid office.3. Factual matrix of the case is that the respondents by notification dated 29.5.2006 notified the list of the elected candidates from the electoral college of farmers and also the electoral college of traders/brokers. Name of the petitioner appeared in the electoral college of traders and brokers in that notification. Being the member of that college, the name of the petitioner was included in the list of elected members as is evident from Annexure-3 placed on record. Programme for conducting the election to the office of Chairperson and Vice Chairman of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Kota was declared on 6.6.2006 by th...
Sanjay Sharma Vs. Smt. Aradhana Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-25-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj253
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The VEDAS suggest division of human life into four stages viz. Brahamacharya, Grihastha, Vaanprastha and Sanyaasa, commonly known as four Aashramas. In the Brahamacharya Aashrama one passes through the life of studen-thood, in the Grihastha Aashrama one passes through the life of house-holder, in the Vaanprastha one retires from worldly pursuits, and in the Sanyaasa Aashrama one renounces all worldly attachments. The Grihastha Aashrama begins with marriage. Here the married couple face the hard realities of life. In the stability of families depends the stability of nation. The institution of marriage was established with the purpose of achieving stability in our social life. Marriage is not just a social contract. It is much more than that. As a family is the nucleus of a nation, it has to be protected with great care and all costs. The facts of this case however reveal that the young couple did not rise cheerfully to the occasion and failed to recognise their ...
Shekhar Gaur Vs. Shall Kanwar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-24-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2161
Guman Singh, J.1. This civil miscellaneous matrimonial appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 24.5.2000 passed by the Family Court No. 1, Jaipur in Case No. 408/1998 whereby petition for divorce u/S. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') filed by the appellant-husband was dismissed with costs of Rs. 1000/-.2. In brief the facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant husband (for short 'the husband') was married to the respondent wife (for short 'the wife') on 20.11.1989 at Sangaria, District Hanumangarh as per Hindu rites. One female child was born out of their wedlock on 9.5.1991. It was averred that the first year of the marriage between the parties passed peacefully. On the wife being pregnant by six months, she was taken to Sangaria by her father for delivery. There she underwent an operation on account of some complications at the time of delivery but no information was given to her in-laws. The information of delivery was also given...
Sushila Devi (Smt.) and ors. Vs. Mahavir Kumar Sanghi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-24-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2461
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This is a defendant-tenant's second appeal under Section 100 of C.P.C. whereby the appellants have challenged the concurrent findings of the two courts below decreeing the suit of eviction on the ground of personal bonafide need in favour of the plaintiff-landlord-respondent herein.2. Mr. Ashok Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants, has submitted that since the bonafide need of the plaintiff-respondent, Shri Mahaveer Kumar Sanghi, who was a practicing advocate extinguished with the death of the said plaintiff-respondent on 1.5.2004 during the pendency of this appeal, therefore, the decree cannot be executed and a substantial question of law arises in the present appeal. He relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kedar Nath Agarwal (Dead) and Another v. Dhanraji Devi (Dead) by L. Rs. and Another 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 45 (SC); Pratap Rai Tanwani and Anr. v. Uttam Chand and Anr. 2004 (2) Apex Court Judgments 391 (SC) and Parmanand v...
Vishnu Kanta (Smt.) Vs. Jagdish and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-24-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj3194
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is aggrieved against the order dated 5.12.2001 by which the trial court allowed the plaintiff's application filed under Order 22 Rule 4 read with Rule 9 CPC dated 20.10.2000 and refused to dismiss the suit as abated.3. The petitioner submitted an application under Order 43 Rule l(k) read with Section 151 CPC on 23.5.2007 and sought permission to get this revision petition converted into civil misc. appeal. It will be relevant that this revision petition has been filed before this Court on 25.1.2002 and application for treating the revision as appeal has been filed after more than five years, on 23.5.2007.4. It appears from the order dated 5.12.2001 that the trial court allowed the application of the plaintiff under Order 22 Rule 4 read with Rule 9 CPC and thereby has not refused to set aside the abatement of the suit nor it has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff, therefore, the order is not appealable under Or...
Narendra Kumar Kamboj Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-24-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN452
H.R. Panwar, J.1. By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to declare that he retired from service with effect from 31.05.2001 on attaining the age of superannuation and further a direction to the respondents to issue retirements orders with all consequential benefits. In the alternative, the petitioner sought a direction to the respondents to treat him a voluntarily retired w.e.f. 22.07.1989 with all consequential benefits.2. The facts of the case, in a nut shell, are that the petitioner was appointed as Teacher Grade III on 30.07.1963. Vide order dt. 22.07.1989, he was transferred and releived from the Government Primary School, Subhanala, whereupon he made a representation on 04.08.1990 for cancellation of the transfer order and alternatively sought voluntary retirement. Thereafter on 15.09.2004, he served a notice upon the respondents vide Annex. 2 and a reply to that notice was given by the respondents on 28.10.2...
Nathuram and ors. Vs. Barsingharam and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-24-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN483
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By way of filing present writ petition, petitioners are challenging the impugned order dt. 24.05.2001 (Annexure-4) passed by Board of Revenue and prayed for confirming the judgment dt. 26.08.1993 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Jodhpur in an appeal filed by the petitioners.2. According to the facts narrated in the writ petition, one Kishorilal Paliwal was the khatedar of the land situated in khasra No. 1460 measuring 48 bighas 11 biswas in village Mandla, Tehsil Phalodi, District Jodhpur. The petitioners are sons of late Kishorilal Paliwal and after his death, being his successors they became owner of the aforesaid land.3. As per contention of the petitioners, the mutation was made in favour of respondents Nos.1 and 2 in the year 1986, but it was not in the knowledge of petitioners. The said mutation was made on the basis of sale deed, which was alleged to be made by late Kishori Lal Paliwal, therefore, the said mutation was completely made in the back o...
industrial Area Manufacturers Association and ors. Vs. Jaipur Vidyut V ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-23-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2491
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Aforesaid two writ petitions have been filed with the prayer that the action of the respondents in requiring the petitioners to make the changeover from LT to HT supply and accordingly procure such electricity supply on 11 KV within one month and according to Note-1 below condition No. 2 of Terms and Conditions for Supply of Electricity-2004, provide transformer sub-station and allied accessories for taking prescribed voltage supply at his cost, be declared illegal and quashed and set aside.3. Alwar Zila Laghu Udyog Sangh had earlier approached the Corporate Level Settlement Committee under directions of this Court in their earlier writ petition No. 703/2006 decided on 30.1.2006. The Settlement Committee vide its order dated 25.4.2006 declared that no settlement seems tenable and therefore no settlement could be arrived at. The petitioner has, therefore, challenged that order in the present proceedings as also the notice dat...
Garima Dixit (Miss) Vs. University of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-23-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj2947
Rafiq, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition, has challenged the communication dated 28.6.2006 issued by the Rajasthan Institute of Speech and Hearing, Jaipur, namely, respondent No. 3 and the letter dated 21.6.2006 addressed to the Principal of respondent No. 3 by the Registrar, University of Rajasthan. The petitioner was admitted to the Research Education & Audiological Development Society in the four years' degree course of Bachelor in Audiology Speech Language Pathology. He prosecuted studies for complete one year. At the time when the petitioner was due to appear in the examination, the Registrar of the University vide letter dated 21.6.2006 informed, the Principal of that College that oh scrutiny of his enrollment form it has been observed that the petitioner was not eligible for admission as the petitioner is having lower percentage of marks than required. It was, therefore, directed that the admission of the petitioner be cancelled. On that basis, the Director of the Instit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »