Rajasthan Court September 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.
Lrs. of Basti Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN36
Prakash Tatia, J.1. At the request of learned Counsel for the parties the writ petition is heard finally.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that petitioner applied for sanction of one additional Naka and water course also. That prayer was allowed by the Executive Engineer vide order dt. 29.09.2006. The respondents Nos. 4 to 6 preferred an appeal against the order dt. 29.09.2006. That appeal was allowed by the Superintending Engineer vide order dt. 13.06.2007. The petitioner is aggrieved against the order dt. 13.06.2007.3. It appears from the facts of the case that the Superintending Engineer, CAD, Srivijaynagar vide order dt. 13.06.2007 held that the Executive Engineer did not technically examined all the aspects of the matter before granting facility to the petitioner vide order dt. 29.09.2006. The respondents' contention was that their Dhani is situated in Murabba No. 191/352 at Killa No. 4 and if the water course is opened then because of the seepage, their Dhani may damage. Lear...
Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Rajasthan Gramodyog Sansthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1337
R.M. Lodha, J.1. M/s. Rajasthan Gramodyog Sansthan (for short, 'the assessee') is a registered dealer recognised by the Rajasthan Khadi and Village Industries Commission Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Central Act LXI of 1956'). The assessee is engaged in the production and sale of Masalas. In the year 1979-80, the assessee is said to have made inter-state sale of processed Masalas for an amount of Rs. 28,971.88. Again during the year 1980-81, the assessee is said to have made inter-state sale of processed Masalas for an amount of Rs. 16,139.35. The assessee showed the sale for both the years as exempt.2. The assessing authority, however, did not accept the stand of the assessee that the sale effected in the year 1979-80 and 1980-81 were exempted. The assessing authority, accordingly, imposed the Sales Tax @ 10% and also imposed the penalty under Section 9 read with Section 16(1)(e) and 7AA of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. The assessing authority also imposed interest under Section 11-...
Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1187
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. On March 10, 2002 around 1.30 PM while Shyam Singh, appellant herein, was sitting inside a tea-shop, Harji a milk vendor (since deceased) arrived and demanded payment which was due against the appellant for the milk supplied to him. After hot exchanges, appellant caught hold of Harji from neck and pressed it as a result of which Harji died. The appellant was put to trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track) Hindaun City District Karauli, who vide judgment dated August 13, 2003 convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. Informant Sinna (Pw.5) handed over a written report of the incident at the Police Station Hindaun City. On that report case under Sections 302/34 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Autopsy on the dead body was performed, necessary memos were drawn, statements of witnesses were re...
Ratan Vs. Ajmer Central Co-operative Bank and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Raj144
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 5-7-2004 passed by the learned single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3770/04 which had been filed by the petitioner/appellant herein for quashing the auction purchase of the land which had been mortgaged by the de-ceased-debtor-Abhay Raj in favour of the respondent-Bank-Ajmer Co-operative Bank Ltd. for securing a loan of Rs. 3 lacs for purchase of a canter.2. The writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge upholding the auction proceeding and auction purchase but a liberty was left to the petitioner to file a representation before the Bank,3. In order to appreciate the controversy which has led to the filing of this appeal, it may be stated that the cousins of the petitioner/appellant herein had executed a power of attorney in favour of his deceased-cousin brother Abhay Raj for obtaining a loan of Rs. 3 lacs from the respondent-Bank who had mortgaged Khasra No. 3490 measuring 6 bighas 15 biswas and Khasra No. ...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Kumari Amrit Kaur Rai and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR723]; RLW2008(2)Raj1123
R.M. Lodha, J.1. The Railway has filed this writ petition aggrieved by the order dated 20th December, 2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur whereby the Original Application filed by the present respondent No. 1 has been allowed and the direction has been issued to place her as senior clerk w.e.f. 4th April, 1989 in the seniority list of senior clerks.2. The controversy arises thus:(a) Kumari Amrit Kaur Rai-respondent No. 1 (for short, 'the employee') was appointed on 6th November, 1986 as Junior Clerk, on compassionate ground in Kota Division of Western Railway.(b) Railway Recruitment Board, in the year 1988, held the examination for direct recruitment of senior clerks against the service graduates quota. The employee appeared in the said examination and was declared successful.(c) On 15th December, 1988, a list of successful candidates from amongst the service graduates of Kota division for recruitment to Class III posts (senior clerk) was published....
Om Singh Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN34
Rajesh Balia, J.1. The Corpus Ms. Raju Kanwar was produced on 22.08.2007 before the Court and considering the possibility of her being under the influence of respondent, with whom she has remained for more than three months, she was directed to be housed at Nari Niketan. She was again produced in the Court on 27.08.2007 from Nari Niketan and the Court noticed from the facts as emerging from the statements of the girl & the petitioner that she has left her house voluntarily to marry respondent No. 4 Mangu Singh son of Prem Singh & has married him. Since parties wanted sometime, the Court considered appropriate to allow girl to remain at Nari Niketan to be independent of all influences from either party. She was again produced on 05.09.2007 from Nari Niketan on which date the parties prayed for more time for settlement, but the position remained the same.2. Because of the inter-se relation between the parties, the respondent No. 4 and Ms. Raju Kanwar developed intimacy and she voluntaril...
Laxmi (Mst.) and ors. Vs. Rajendra and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN172
Prakash Tatia, J.1. At the request of learned Counsel for the parties, the appeal itself is heard finally.2. The appellants' contention is that the case was fixed for the evidence of the defendants on 03.04.2006 and on that day no instruction was pleaded by their counsel and the trial Court closed the evidence of the defendants on the same day and thereafter, decreed the suit of the plaintiffs. Since there was no evidence in rebuttal of the defendants, therefore, the suit was decreed. According to learned Counsel for the appellants, the appellants had no knowledge that their advocate will plead no instruction on 03.04.2006. It is also submitted that on 02.02.2006, the plaintiffs' evidence was closed and first date for evidence of the defendants was fixed on 06.03.2006 and on 03.04.2006 the counsel for the appellants-defendants pleaded no instruction. It is submitted that a liberal view be taken and the appellants may be given an opportunity to produce their evidence.3. Learned Counsel ...
Jodhpur Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN205
Govind Mathur, J.1. Both these petitions for writ being based on same facts were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.2. The Managing Director of the petitioner Co-operative Bank by an order dt. 21.09.2001 dismissed Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma (respondent No. 3) from service and the order aforesaid came to be confirmed by the appellate authority vide order dt. 19.01.2004. By way of filing a revision petition under Section 107 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2001'), validity, propriety and correctness of the orders referred above was assailed by the respondent No. 3 before the State Government. The petitioner objected maintainability of that on the count that under Section 107 of the Act of 2001, the State Government is empowered to revise the orders passed by the officers subordinate to it and not otherwise. The objection was turned down by the Minister for Department of Cooperative Societies, hence by way of f...
Rajesh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1030
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Dead body of Sawant Ram was found in a dry well. According to prosecution Rajesh and Nihal Singh, appellants herein, committed murder of Sawant Ram by inflicting injury on his head and pushing him down into the well whereas defence has come up with the story that Sawant Ram in a drunken state himself accidentally slipped into the well and died. Learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Kishangarhbas District Alwar, however found the prosecution evidence trustworthy and vide judgment dated October 18, 2002 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:Under Section 302 IPC:Both to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years.Under Section 201 IPC:Both to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. Prabhu Dayal (Pw. 2) a retired teach...
Hotel Meru Palace Karamchari Sangthan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR133]; 2008(2)WLN203
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Since on same set of facts similar prayers have been made both the writ petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.2. Petitioners while challenging the closure and retrenchment have prayed for directions to the State Government to issue an order under Section 10K of the Rajasthan Industrial Disputes Act for certain directions to the respondent employer protecting rights of the concerned workmen.3. A bare reading of Section 10K of the Act would show that it is total discretion of the State Government to issue an order under Section 10K considering all the circumstances as placed before the concerning authority. No directions as such can be issued by this Court under writ jurisdiction to the authorities for issuing an order under Section 10K. This Court under writ jurisdiction does not sit in appeal over the discretion so used by the authorities in such matters, moreso, when there are number of disputed questions of fact and law, the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »