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.
R.K. College Vs. Ramesh Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-22-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2046
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act') has been preferred by the owner of the vehicle involved in accident against the award dated 28.06.1994 made by the Motor Accidents Tribunal, Jodhpur in Claim Case No. 214/1991 whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 44,621/- to the injured claimant for the loss suffered by him due to the injuries sustained in accident; but has exonerated the insurer of its liability on the ground that the vehicle was being plied on a nationalised route in contravention of the terms of permit.2. Only the finding on exoneration of the insurer having been questioned in this appeal, a brief reference to the background facts would suffice. The claimant-respondent No. 1 Ramesh Chand Vyas, while joining his wife Smt. Chandra Kanta as claimant No. 2, sought compensation in the sum of Rs. 3,04,250/- against the driver, owner, and insurer of a mini bus bearing registration No. RJ19 P 0123 for...
Vandana Gupta (Dr.) Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-22-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(3)Raj2467
Prem Shanker Asopa, J. 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 18.3.1996 passed by the State Government whereby increase in the earlier sanctioned amount has been denied and has further claimed reimbursement of the balance amount of treatment abroad of her husband, amounting to Rs. 11.04 lacs together with interest. Further prayer for grant of compensation has also been made by the petitioner.2. Facts of the case with regard to taking medical treatment abroad by husband of the petitioner Rajendra Kumar Gupta, who at the relevant time was employed as Electrical Engineer in Instrumentation Limited, Kota are not in dispute. Other facts of sanction of Rs. 2 lacs by way of advance vide order dated 7.7.1995 and receipt thereof by the petitioner are also not disputed. Petitioner in para 8 of the writ petition has mentioned the fact that the Principal, SMS Medical College vide his letter dated 5.4.1995 clarified that bone marrow transplant facility is n...
Dinesh Kumar @ Leelu and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-22-2007
Reported in: I(2008)DMC94; RLW2007(4)Raj2925
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. This appeal, on behalf of three appellants, namely, (1) Dinesh Kumar @ I.eelu S/o Shri Amarsingh @ Phool, (2) Santra W/o Shri Amarsingh and (3) Amarsingh @ Phool Singh S/o Shri Kanhaiyalal, is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 12.6.2002 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 2, Kishangarhbas (Alwar), in Sessions Case No. 61/1999, whereby the trial court has convicted and sentenced each appellants as under:Under Section Sentence of Imprisonment304B, IPC To undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment,198-A, IPC To undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment anda fine of Rs. 3,000/- ; in default of paymentof fine, to further undergo six months additionalsimple imprisonmentBoth the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. Brief facts giving rise to this criminal appeal are that on 12.4.1999 Sarjitsingh (PW-3), the father of deceased Saroj, lodged a written-report (Exhibit P- 1) at Police Station Tijara, alleging therein that marriage ...
Madan Mohan Ahir Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-22-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(10)Raj3459
Khem Chand Sharma, J.1. These three appeals have been preferred against the common judgment and order dated 24.1.1996 passed by the learned Single Judge who had been pleased to dismiss the three writ petitions filed by the appellant-Madan Mohan Ahir challenging the order of dismissal from the service of Patwari.2. It is stated that three orders incorporating separate charges were issued on the appellant-Madan Mohan Ahir while functioning on the post of Patwari for 18 years and as per the charges incorporated and served on the appellant, it indicated that he had been alleged to have misappropriated Rs. 100/- while holding auction for plot of land and the allegation was that he had undervalued the property and auctioned it at Rs. 100/- only. The auction, therefore, was ordered to be cancelled by the competent authority and hence the appellant was legally required to refund Rs. 100/- to the auction purchaser. The auction purchaser initially lodged a FIR complaining that although the aucti...
Raj. State Road Transport Corporation and ors. Vs. Bhajan Singh and an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN43
Govind Mathur, J.1. By this petition for writ a challenge is given to the correctness, propriety and validity of the award dt. 12.10.1992 passed by the Labour Court, Bikaner in Industrial Dispute Case No. 23/87. The appropriate government under its notification dt. 24.04.1987 referred an industrial dispute to Labour Court, Bikaner for its adjudication in the terms,whether termination of workman Sh. Bhajan Singh on 28.08.1984 by Divisional Manager, RSRTC, Bikaner is legal and justified? If not, then for what relief and amount the workman is entitled?2. The respondent-workman was employed as Conductor on daily rate basis with employer Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation on 10.10.1983. His name was struck off from the service roll on 28.08.1984. After striking off from service roll the petitioner submitted an application dt. 25.01.1986 to the General Manager (Traffic), Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur for re-employment in service of the Corporation. The General Ma...
Mohd. Saleem Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3350; II(2007)DMC357
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Accused-appellant Mohammad Saleem s/o Mukhtyar Ahmed has preferred this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the judgment and order dated 16.4.2002 of his conviction and sentence passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Jaipur City, Jaipur, in Sessions Case No. 123/2001 (6/2002), whereby he was convicted and sentenced as under:--------------------------------------------------------------------------Under Sentence of imprisonmentSection--------------------------------------------------------------------------304B, IPC To undergo 7 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 6 months additional rigorous imprisonment.498A, IPC To undergo 3 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 2 months additional rigorous imprisonment.-------------------------------------------------------...
Baldev Ram and ors. Vs. Khinv Raj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN9
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dt. 12.02.2001 passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur on application filed by the petitioners under Order 13 Rule 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C. whereby the petitioners prayed for taking on record two judgments dt. 15.06.1998 and 25.04.2000 passed by Revenue Appellate Authority, Jodhpur.2. In this case, earlier, a revision petition was preferred by the petitioners being SB Civil Revision Petition No. 363/2001 against the impugned order dt. 12.02.2001, which was dismissed by this Court on 06.10.2003 in view of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chandra Rai and Ors. reported in : AIR2003SC3044 . In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that revision against an interlocutory order is not permissible to be revised under Section 115 C.P.C. However, a liberty was granted to the petitioners t...
Ramkishan Machra Vs. Rajasthna Rajya Sahkari Spinning and Ginning Mill ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN456
Govind Mathur, J.1. By this petition for writ a challenge is give to the order dt. 29.04.1994 passed by the General Manager, Rajasthan State Cooperative Spinning and Ginning Mills Federation Ltd., Hanumangarh terminating the petitioner from service.2. In brief, facts of the case are that the petitioner in the year 1987 was employed with the respondents as clerk on daily rate basis. By an order dt. 01.03.1994 a regular appointment was given to him as Cotton Delivery Clerk in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1680 and he was placed on probation. By order impugned the petitioner was terminated from service on the grounds that:(1) the Superintendent of Police, Churu found character and conduct of the petitioner suspicious being convicted by a competent Court; (2) the petitioner was facing a criminal trial and this fact was concealed by him; (3) the workman has lost confidence of the management for the reasons mentioned above and as such he was not fit to hold the post; and (4) further continuous of...
K. Shringi (Dr.) Vs. Nuclear Power Corp. of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-20-2007
Reported in: [2007(114)FLR903]; RLW2008(1)Raj910
H.R. Panwar, J.1. By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order Annx. 14 dated 4.8.2006 with the consequential benefits.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed in the Department of Atomic Energy of Government of India on 19.3.1974 and since then he has been working with the said department. The respondent Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (for short, 'the NPCIL' hereinafter) is a Government of India Enterprise and thus amenable to writ jurisdiction being a 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The NPCIL is having a Unit in Rajasthan known as Rajasthan Atomic Power Site (for short, 'the RAPS' hereinafter) and the petitioner has been posted in the hospital of the respondents situated in Bhabha Nagar, Kota and had been working as Medical Superintendent till issuance of the impugned order Annx. 14 da...
Jai Glasskow Vs. Commercial Taxes Officer
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)8VST770(Raj)
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This is a revision petition at the instance of assessee directed against the order of the Tax Board, Ajmer, dated May 19, 1998 whereby the Tax Board held that the assessee was not entitled to purchase lathe machine at concessional rate against the declaration in form C under Section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Section 8(3)(b) of the said Act and, therefore, the assessee was liable to pay the penalty under Section 10A of the said Act at double the rate of concession wrongly availed by him. All the three authorities below, namely, assessing authority, Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and Tax Board have concurrently held against the assessee and have upheld the said penalty amounting to Rs. 13,600.2. Mr. Gogra, learned Counsel for the assessee-petitioner, submits that the Tax Board has erred in upholding the said penalty under Section 10A of the CST Act because the lathe machinery was purchased by the assessee at the concessional rate of three per c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »