Rajasthan Court November 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.
Arjun @ Gogi Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1009
Manak Mohta, J.1. Heard.2. By way of this revision petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity and correctness of orders passed by the courts below refusing to release the delinquent on bail.3. There is allegation of committing murder against the delinquent. As per FIR, on 26.8.2008 Shailesh @ Shunti alongwith his friends were playing cricket at Rajeev Primary School, Ward No. 9, Sector-12, Hanumangarh. At that time, some altercation took place between Shailesh and Arjun @ Gogi, on which, Arjun @ Gogi inflicted a bat blow on the head of Shailesh, as a result of which Shailesh became unconscious and fell down on ground, thereupon, Robin Seni, Mahesh, Gautam etc., immediately informed the family members of victim, on which, Shailesh was rushed to Bombay Hospital, where he was declared dead.4. On this report, a case vide FIR No. 553/08 was registered at P.S. Hanumangarh Junction for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. and the investigation commenced.5. The police after completion...
Kanwar Devi (Smt.) Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and or ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1725
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer that Regional Provident Fund Commissioner be directed to grant and pay family pension to the petitioner under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and other Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 from the date of death of her husband and be further directed to pay family pension to the petitioner as her husband was an ex-army man and retired from the services of the Army on 10.1.1971 having rendered services from 10.1.1956 till then.2. Controversy raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of Kerala High Court in T.A. Prabhavarthy v. UOI O.P. No. 6920/1989 decided on 21.3.1994. In fact, this writ petition was filed in the year 1988. The respondents have all along been contending that the aforesaid judgment of Kerala High Court was challenged before the Supreme Court. This matter was listed on number of dates and was adjourned enabling the respondents to show as to what was the outcome of the ...
Ex. Pnr. Raghubir Mali Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-21-2008
Reported in: RLW2010(1)Raj710
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking payment of disability pension. Petitioner was enrolled in Indian Army as a Sepoy on 11.4.1979. Having been invalidated out of service in category EEE, he was discharged from the army on 22.6.1982. The petitioner served the Indian Army for a total period of 3 years, 2 months and 12 days.3. Shri K.P. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was not granted the disability pension even though the Medical Board, on whose recommendation he was invalidated out of service, clearly opined that his disability was aggravated by military service and that he sustained 20% disability, both of which factors satisfied the requirement of clause 173 of the Pension Regulations for the Army. It was argued that petitioner submitted appeal to the Government of India on 19.1.1985 which was rejected by letter dated 5.12.1985. He thereafter filed another appe...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Secure Meters Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Raj)405
ORDER1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the learned Tribunal dt. 21st Dec., 2005, so far as it relates to Appeal Nos. 390 and 405. However, it is clarified, that as a matter of fact the appeal is confined to the order of the Tribunal so far as it relates to Appeal No. 405 only, which appeal was filed by the assessee, regarding the matter relating to asst. yr. 1996-97. We find from the perusal of para 9 of the order of the Tribunal, that it was conceded that the Revenue's appeal was infructuous, and was inadvertently taken, because the learned CIT(A) has decided the ground in favour of the Revenue itself.2. The appeal was admitted vide order dt. 21st March, 2007, by framing two substantial questions of law reading as under:(1) Whether the amount received by the assessee from its buyers of its product, to the extent it relates to octroi, sales-tax and excise duty is not includible in the total turnover vis-a-vis the export turnover for the purpose of comput...
Naval and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj865
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. In this petition, the petitioners have challenged the negligence on the part of the Doctors, who carried out the sterilization operation-onl4.2.2001 at a camp organized and supervised by the Surgeon of Family Welfare Center, Divisional Hospital, Gangapurcity, the respondent No. 2. The Doctors informed Smt. Uganti, petitioner No.2 that the operation was successful. But after the operation, Smt. Uganti became pregnant and gave birth to a child on 31.8.2002. Since the petitioner are poor, they did not want the fourth pregnancy. It was for the purpose of preventing the pregnancy, that Smt. Uganti had undergone the Sterlisation operation on 14.2.2001.2. It is further claimed by the petitioner that due to the negligence of the Doctors, she has suffered not only physical hardship, but also mental agony. She is also saddled with the responsibility of the fourth child. Therefore, she claims a compensation of Rs. 13,65,000/-from the respondents.3. Mr. Chetan Bairwa, the learne...
Ankush Wadhwa Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1610; RLW2009(1)Raj662
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. A damaged car, an injured young man inside the car, a dead body of a young lady lying beyond a wall, not far from the damaged car, allegations of kidnapping, murder and destruction of evidence, defense of accident, the conviction of both the appellants for various offences are the different strands weaving the tapestry of this case. The appellants, Ankush Wadhwa ('A-1', for short) and Dwarka Prasad ('A-2', for short) have challenged the judgment dated 29.09.2001, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, No. 4, Kota whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:Ankush Wadhwa (A-1)Offences SentenceUnder Section Life Imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 2,000/-,302 IPC in default thereof rigorous imprisonmentfor six months.Under Section Five years rigorous imprisonment alongwith a fine363 IPC of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof rigorous imprisonment for three months.Under Section One year rigorous imprisonment alongwith a fine201 IPC of Rs. 500/-, in de...
Sikander Khan and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1596
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. Challenge in this appeal, filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code', for short), is to the correctness of the judgment and order dated 19-3-2004 rendered in Sessions Case No. 05/2001 (1/2000) by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Sirohi.2. By the impugned judgment and order, appellant No. 1 Sikander Khan (A-1 for short), has been convicted for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 324 and 352 of IPC and has been sentenced to imprisonment of life and fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to one year imprisonment under Section 302, IPC, seven years R.I. and fine' of Rs. 5,000/- in default of payment of fine one year imprisonment. Under Section 307, IPC, one year R.I. and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in de-fault of payment of fine one year imprisonment under Section 324, IPC and one month R.I. under Section 352, IPC, whereas Appellant No. 2 Zahir Abbas (for short A-2) has been convicted for commission of the offence punishable under Section...
Narendra Kumar Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-19-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj967; 2009(1)WLN192
Vineet Kothari, J.1. By this petition, petitioner has prayed for quashing his reversion order dated 2/9/1996 and has sought further direction to the respondents to treat him regularised on the post of Lecturer (School Education) in Mathematics, the post on which he has been working for last 16 years since 1980 when this writ petition was filed in the year 1996.2. By the impugned order Annex. 1 dated 2/9/2996 the petitioner was reverted back to the post of Gr. II teacher. The petitioner was appointed under Rule 27 of the Rajasthan Education (Subordinate Service) Rules, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 1971') on the post of Lecturer (School Education) vide order dated 24/9/1980, Annex.5 on record. The said appointment though initially made on ad hoc and temporary basis on the condition that same will continue for a period of one year or till the point of time when the regularly selected candidates from Departmental Promotion Committee or Public Service Commission are availabl...
Hanuman Singh Chauhan Vs. Chairman Central Social Welfare Board and an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-19-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1739
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not counting services rendered by him from 5/6/1959 to 11/9/1968 with the respondent No. 3 Rajasthan State Social Welfare Advisory Board, Jaipur.2. Shri Rajendra Singh Bhadauria, learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner served the Rajasthan State Social Welfare Advisory Board, Jaipur for the aforesaid period and thereafter he was selected in the services of the Central Social Welfare Board as a Welfare Officer w.e.f. 12/9/1968. He served the Central Social Welfare Board till 31/10/1994 on which 'date he retired on attaining the age of superannuation. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Central Board vide memorandum dated 12/5/1994 directed that period of services of the employees who formerly rendered services to the State Social Welfare Board prior to their joining the Central Social Welfare Board, shall be considered for t...
Smt. Imiya Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-18-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)WLN400
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This writ petition by the claimant- petitioner is directed against the order dated 06.01.2005 as passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Barmer whereby the learned Tribunal has proceeded to allow a review application filed by the respondent No. 1 United India Insurance Company Ltd. and has recalled the order dated 24.09.2004 that was passed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act').2. Briefly put, the background facts and relevant aspects of the matter are that the claimant-petitioner lost her husband Sheraram in a vehicular accident that occurred on 20.07.2002 on National Highway No. 15 near Varahai for collision of two vehicles bearing registration Nos. GJ-12AV-5255 and RJ04/G-0755. The claimant-petitioner and the parents of the deceased Sheraram have filed a claim application under Section 166 of the Act against the drivers, owners and insurers of both the vehicles involved in the accident while stating that the victim Sheraram was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »