Rajasthan Court January 2008 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.
Daulat Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2095
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Daulat Ram, appellant herein, was put to trial on the allegations of committing 'dowry death' of his wife before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Tonk, who vide judgment dated November 7, 2003 convicted and sentenced him as under:Under Section 304B IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Under Section 498A IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 100/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. It is the prosecution case that on March 7, 2003 at 1.30 PM informant Prakash Khatri (Pw.9) submitted a written report (Ex.P-14) at police station Deoli District Tonk to the effect that his sister Parmeshwari, who married to Daulat Kumar on June 29, 2001, was subjected to harassment in connection with demand of dowry by her husband and in-laws. In the mornin...
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Dhanna Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN514
Manak Mohta, J.1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the non claimant No. 3, Oriental Insurance Co. Limited against the Interim Award dt. 21.05.1999 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bali Distt. Pali in Claim Case No. 2/1999, whereby the learned Tribunal has passed Interim Award under Section 140 of the M.V. Act on the basis of 'No Fault Liability' to the tune of Rs. 25,000/-.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that on 05.06.1998, the claimant Dhanna Ram was travelling in a Jeep bearing No. RJ-01T/0008. The jeep was being driven by Chandan Puri (Non-claimant No. 2) rashly and negligently met an accident near Dutharia village on Nadol-Somesher Road. Another Jeep bearing No. RSE 1845 was being driven by Saleem (Driver) rashly and negligently, hit the standing jeep No. RJ-01-T/0008, in which, the claimant was sitting, on account of which, his left leg was fractured, therefore, he filed a claim petition for compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,32,000/-.3. After s...
Rakesh Bhandari (Dr.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj1963
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length.2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging allotment of retail outlet of petroleum products by the respondent No. 2 - Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL for short) in pursuance of advertisement Annex. 1 dated 10.2.2005 for place Kelwa NH-8 in Dist. Rajsamand at serial No. 79 in the list. The petitioner has prayed that award of said dealership in favour of private respondent No. 3 Mr. Pawar Kumar Paliwal was on account of indiscriminate award of higher marks in the selection process to the said respondent and therefore, the petitioner was deliberately kept marginally lower at second place and while total marks awarded to the private respondent No. 3 Mr. Pawan Kumar Paliwal was 86.9, the marks awarded to the petitioner was 85.1 in the selection interview held on 11.6.2005 for said outlet at Kelwa and therefore, allotment in favour of the private respondent No. 3 deserves to be quashed an...
Satya Narayan @ Sattu Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2106
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The joyous occasion of a marriage, suddenly turned into a tragedy, when allegedly the appellant hit Bhairon Lal, a member of the wedding party with a piece of wood and consequently Bhairon Lal died. Convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and imposed with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and directed to further undergo one year of simple imprisonment in default thereof, the appellant has challenged the judgment dated 2.12.2002 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Kota before this court.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 16.6.02 one Kishan Lal submitted a written report (Ex. P.4) before the Police Station, Seemlia, District Kota wherein he alleged that he alongwith the appellant and Bhairon Lal had come as members of a wedding party from Lalpura to Gumanpura. According to him there were about 30-40 members in the wedding party. As the wedding procession was proceeding towards the wedding place, the men were danc...
Santosh Devi (Smt.) and ors. Vs. Sohan Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)WLN419
S.P. Pathak, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed against the Judgment/Award dt. 10.05.2004 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur in MAC No. 776/04, whereby in all Rs. 5,77,488/- has been awarded as compensation to the claimants.2. The case of the claimants is that on 06.11.2001 Shri Chhote Lal was going on a motor-cycle bearing number RJ-29-1 M-5499 towards Jaipur. When he reached near Ganesh Pipe Factory, Khokala, a Jeep bearing number RJ- 29-P-0395, driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, came from opposite direction and hit the motor-cycle, resulting in severe injuries to Chhote Lal. On account of severe injuries; Chhote Lal died. In the claim petition it was stated that Shri Chhote Lal was employed in Army and was a young man of 23 years of age and was earning Rs. 5,658/- p.m. It was also averred that deceased Chhote Lal was having bright future. In different heads compensation was sought of Rs. 59,84,000...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Dhara Singh and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR719]
Guman Singh, J.1. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the petition for compensation was not filed within the limitation as provided under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act as the same was filed after the delay of 2 years.Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that delay in filing the petition has been condoned by a separate order passed by the learned Commissioner vide order dated 22.7.2005 after considering the reasons for the delay. The learned Counsel for appellant further submits that the accident took place outside the scope of employment of the deceased. At the time of accident, he had finished the work and headed for his village and he met within an accident while crossing the railway track. Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the accident took place while going and coming to the place of work in the work premises, amounts to an accident during scope of employment in which he has engaged as the accident is not unconnected with the employme...
Cit Vs. Mangilal Rameshwar Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Raj)696; [2009]312ITR179(Raj)
ORDER1. This appeal and the cross objections have been filed by the Revenue and the assessee, respectively, against the order of the learned Tribunal dt. 19.3.2004. Before the Tribunal cross appeals were filed; one by the assessee, and the other by the Revenue. The matter relates to block assessment, for the block period 1987-88 to 1997 98. The appeal has been admitted, vide order dt. 17.12.2004, by framing following substantial questions of law. 1. Whether the jurisdiction of Assessing Officer for assessment of undisclosed income in a block assessment under Section 158BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is limited to the material found during the search or on the basis of information available the Assessing Officer could estimate the income to the best of his judgment de hors the material on record, appreciating the factual circumstances of the case?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the learned tribunal was justified in deleting the entire trading additions so also the ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mantra Tantra Yantra Vigyan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Raj)685; [2008]300ITR140(Raj)
ORDER1. These nine appeals, arise in identical circumstances, and involve common questions, and are, therefore, being decided by this common order.2. Before proceeding further, it may be observed, that in one of the appeals, being Appeal No. 53 of 2004, the appeal was admitted by framing two substantial questions of law as under:(1) Whether the learned Tribunal has erred in law in affirming the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the AO on account of life membership subscriptions received by the assessee treating the same as income and whether the finding of the learned Tribunal is perverse?(2) Assuming that the subscription received by the assessee was a capital receipt by way of deposit and the subscription of the subscriber was to be adjusted against the income arising out of the said deposit, whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that interest which the assessee has shown accrued on the said deposits also does not form part of the income to the assessee mer...
General Manager Hmt Ltd. and anr. Vs. Damodar Prasad Agarwal (Through ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(2)Raj1569
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The respondent was dismissed from service by the appellants on the ground of misconduct. The order of dismissal was assailed by the respondent by filing appeal and after unsuccessful appeal a writ petition was filed by him which was allowed by the learned Single Judge on November 6, 1998. In this appeal, the appellants have called in question the said order of learned Single Judge, whereby the dismissal of respondent was set aside with all consequential benefits.2. Contextual facts depict that the respondent was appointed in the appellant-company as Technical Buyer on November 11, 1971 and promoted as Supervisor in 1975 and Purchase Officer in 1981 (Junior Design Engineer). On April 6/8, 1992 charge sheet (Annexure-12) was issued against respondent on the ground of misconduct in availing unauthorised leave between March, 1990 to February, 1992. Regarding the alleged absents the respondent replied that due to serious illness of his wife, who had undergone operati...
Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Beni Das Agrawal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj1968
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Beni Das Agarwal (for short 'BDA') respondent herein, in the writ petition filed before the learned Single Judge sought following reliefs:(i) to quash the order dated July 10, 1995 of Member Secretary Building Plan Committee II (for short BPC-II) as well as the minutes drawn on July 10, 1995 by BPC-II Jaipur Development Authority (JDA).(ii) to direct JDA not to act contrary to the approved maps.(iii) to direct JDA not to demolish construction made by BDA.2. Learned Single Judge vide order dated November 25, 1997 allowed the writ petition in terms of prayer made by BDA.3. Challenge in this appeal is to the aforequoted order of learned Single Judge.4. The writ petition was filed in the backdrop of the facts that the plot No. H-19 Subhash Marg C-scheme Jaipur owned by BDA was a sub-divided plot of original land situated at Mirza Ismile Road Jaipur. The plot came to be allotted to M/s. Chunni Lal Ramgopal & Sons on June 7, 1994 for commercial use. The measurements o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »