Rajasthan Court July 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.
Gaura Devi (Smt.) and ors. Vs. Mr. Kishan Lal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN382
Ashok Parihar, J.1. The appeal is disposed of finally as prayed by counsel for the parties.2. The appellants claimants have challenged the award dated 19.03.2005 passed by the Tribunal only to the extent a condition has been put that amount of compensation should not be disbursed to the appellants claimant still an undertaking is given by the owner of the vehicle in favour of the Insurance Company.3. After having considered entire facts and circumstances, this Court has expressed anxiety on such conditions. The claimants cannot be left on the mercy of the Insurance Company for recovery of their amount. In given cases the owner may not even appear before the Court or the Tribunal making impossible for the claimants to recover the amount thereby only adding hardship and miseries to them. It is for the Insurance Company to recover the amount from the owner before appropriate forum. The claimants cannot be made to suffer on account of inter-se dispute between the owner and the Insurance Co...
Prema Alias Prem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4638; RLW2007(4)Raj2999
Deo Narayan Thanvi, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Bhilwara, dated 20.9.2001 whereby he convicted the accused appellant Prema alias Prem Singh for the offence Under Section 8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter referred-to as 'the Act of 1985' and sentenced him to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. one lac and in default, to further undergo six months' additional simple imprisonment.2. The charge against the accused was that on 18.5.2000 at SP.M., the Checking Party headed by S.H.O., Police Station Phulia Kala, District Ajmer, recovered 35 kgs. of poppy straw near Balapura, which he was carrying in 'bags' and 'katta' on his vehicle TVS Champ No.RJ14-llM-7895 for which he was having no valid permit or licence. After completing the formalities of taking sample etc., accused was challaned under Section 8/15 of the Act of 1985. He was charged by the learned Special Judge acco...
Mahesh Chandra Rawat Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(4)Raj3442
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The accused petitioner, Mahesh Rawat, has challenged the order dated 9.6.1998 passed by the Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act Cases), Jaipur whereby the learned Judge has directed initiation of denovo trial.2. The brief fact of the case are that the petitioner was running shop No. 555 near the Airport at Sanganer, and was appointed as a retail dealer of essential commodities by grant of licence under Essential Commodities Act ('E.C. Act', for short). Allegedly from 18.6.1996 to 22.7.1996 the said shop was inspected by the Assistant District Supply Officer, Jaipur. According to his report, certain irregularities and ommissions were discovered at the shop. The said report was submitted to the Deputy Commissioner on 23.7.1996. Thereafter, a criminal complaint was filed before the concerned court for offences under Sections 3/7/8 of the E.C. Act. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined sixteen witnesses and the defence examined a single witness...
Ram Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj49
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant seeks to set aside the judgment dated August 27, 2002 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Sikar, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced as under:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer two months imprisonment.Under Section 364 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer one month imprisonment.Sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. It is the prosecution case that on April 21, 2001 at 12.30 PM when the SHO Police Station Sadar Sikar reached to the village Deep Pura Rajaj Ji, Badri Prasad (PW. 3) handed over a written report (Ex.P-9) and appellant Ram Lal to the SHO. It was inter alia stated in the report that the appellant who had been employed for agricultural work some time back, came to his Dhani on April 20, 2001 and took his son Gheesa Ram, aged 9 years, with him on the pretext of provi...
Goga Vs. Sh. Ratan Singh and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN497
Ashok Parihar, J.1. The appellant has prayed for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal vide order dt. 11.06.2001 by which in a case of injuries the appellant has been awarded a sum of Rs. 1,51,000/- as compensation.2. After hearing counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record.3. There is no dispute that the age of the appellant has been taken as 25 years. He was working as a labour. Due to accident he suffered not only head injury but fracture on right hand as well. As per medical report taking the disability as 50% the amount of compensation has been quantified by the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal it seems has not correctly read the medical certificate. The Tribunal has taken into consideration the 50% disability because of fracture on right hand whereas the Medical Board was of the opinion that the appellant had suffered Hameparisis on right side as a result of head injury thereby causing 50% permanent disability. As per medical opinio...
Smt. Prem Kumari Mudria Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)211CTR(Raj)500; [2008]303ITR128(Raj)
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant.2. By filing this appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961, the assessee has challenged the judgment delivered by the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Appeal Nos. 347/2002 and 348/2002. The Tribunal dismissed both the appeals by common judgment.3. In the present tax appeal, the appellant has challenged the order of the Tribunal passed in Appeal No. 348/2002 which relates to the asst. yr. 1995-96.4. The appellant assessee constructed a house in the city of Udaipur located at 9, Govindpura Colony. The construction was completed during the financial yrs. 1993-94 to 1997-98. The said factual aspect has also been incorporated by the CIT(A) in his order. The cost of construction was referred to valuation cell, Ajmer by the A.M. and the Valuation Officer has determined the cost of construction at Rs. 65,54,555, as per the details given in para 2 of the judgment of the CIT(A) for asst. yrs. 1994-95, 1996-97 and 199...
Gopal Singh Vs. Gaj Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Raj227; RLW2007(4)Raj3536
ORDERGopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By way of filing the present appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure defendant-Gopal Singh is challenging the judgment and decree dated 27-4-1989 passed by Addl. District Judge, Bhilwara in Civil Original Suit No. 63/77.2. According to facts emerging from the suit, respondent-Gaj Singh s/o Baldeo Singh filed suit for partition and appellant-Gopal Singh s/o Baldeo Singh, Smt. Gulab Kanwar wd/o Baldeo Singh and Smt. Prem Kanwar d/o Baldeo Singh were impleaded as defendants in the suit. Obviously, the plaintiff and defendants are legal heirs of late Baldeo Singh. In the suit, plaintiff-Gaj Singh made a prayer that decree may be passed for partition of the property of late Baldeo Singh and half portion of the property may be decreed in his favour and possession thereof may be delivered to him. The plaintiff further prayed in the suit that income of the property from the date of filing suit till his possession may also be decreed in his favour.3....
Rajendra Kumar and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj62
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Rajendra Kumar and Mohan Lal, appellants herein, were put to trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Chhabra District Baran, who vide judgment dated January 17, 2003 convicted Rajendra Kumar under Section 302 and Mohan Lal under Section 302/34 and sentenced each of them to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer two years rigorous imprisonment.2. It is the prosecution case that on July 25, 2000 at 11.00 AM at General Hospital Atru informant Narendra Kumar (PW. 8) handed over a written report (Ex.P-7) to Kalyan Prasad, ASI Police Station Atru stating therein that on the said day around 10 AM while his uncle Nand Kishore was working in the field, as many as 15 persons of village Harnavda including the appellants entered into the field with cattle and started damaging crop of Soyabin. When Nand Kishore protested he was given beating with lathis. On that report a case under Sections 307, 323, 147, 148, 14...
Babu Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj53
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Babu Lal, appellant herein, was put to trial for committing murder of his own father before learned Additional Sessions Judge Behror District Alwar, who vide judgment dated November 25, 2000 convicted and sentenced him under Section 302 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer three months imprisonment.2. It is the prosecution case that on October 15, 1998 informant Gheesa Ram (PW. 1) submitted a written report (Ex.P-1) at Police Station Mandan stating therein that on the said day his son Sarjeet and grand son Babu Lal had hot exchanges in connection with sale of millet, thereupon Babu Lal inflicted a knife blow on the person of Sarjeet, who was removed to hospital where he was declared dead. On that report a case under Sections 302 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Necessary memos were drawn, statements of witnesses were recorded, appellant was arrested and on completion of investigation charge sheet...
Ram Swaroop Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ613; 2006WLC(Raj)UC295
ORDERR.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner, a S.H.O. at the relevant time, has challenged the continuation of the criminal proceedings against him, and the order of cognizance dated 27-9-1994 as well as order dated 18-11-1997 passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 12, Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby the learned Magistrate had dismissed the petitioner's application under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('the Code' for short).2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1, Radha Raman Kalani alleged that he has sent two reports to P.S. Ashok Nagar on 27-5-1993. However, the police did not register any formal FIR on the said reports. Simultaneously, on the same day, a FIR was registered against the respondent No. 1, Mr. Kalani, being FIR No. 208/ 1993, for offences under Sections 406 and 420, I.P.C. Subsequently on 3-7-1993, Mr. Kalani lodged a complaint against Sh. R.C. Daga and twenty others in the Court of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 12...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »