Rajasthan Court August 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.
Mahesh Chand Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(3)Raj2347
Mahesh Bhagwati, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 5th August, 1987 whereby the Additional Sessions Judge No. 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur convicted the accused appellant in the offence under Sections 366 of 1PC and sentenced him to Rigorous Imprisonment of four years and a fine of Rs. 200/-; in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment of one month.2. The prosecution story as unravelled for trial, runs as under:That the complainant PW.2 Suresh Chand Jain and the accused appellant Mahesh Chand were living in one house No. 214 situated in front of Veer Hanuman Tample in Brahmpuri, Jaipur. The complainant was living with his wife Smt. Manju. The accused used to visit his home frequently. On 21st October, 1986 at about 9.30 AM, he went on duty to SMS Hospital as usual. When he returned in the evening at 6.00 PM, he found the door locked. He enquired about his wife from his landlord but he replied that he did not know anything. Till late night-he wait...
Siya Ram Jajra Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3617
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. In this application under Section II of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short '1996 Act') the applicant seeks to appoint independent arbitrator.3. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. Gill, learned Additional Advocate General that since the applicant has not moved the application along with nonrefundable prescribed fee to the Engineer-in-Charge, in view of Clause 23 of the agreement the instant application seeking appointment of arbitrator is not maintainable: Mr. Gill vociferously canvassed that the provisions contained in Section 11 of 1996 Act are not applicable to the matters covered by Clause 23 of the agreement. According to Mr. Gill applicant is not entitled to any relief since provisions of Clause 23 of the agreement were not followed.4. In order to appreciate the submission of Mr. Gill, a look at Clause 23 of the agreement appears necessary which provides thus:If any question, difference or ...
Ramraj Tada Vs. State and 2 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
Reported in: RLW2010(1)Raj424
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. Since all the petitions involve identical issues, hence are being disposed of together.2. Question arising for consideration is as to whether persons holding qualification of Sr. Secondary (Vocation) from recognized Board of Education can be considered to be ineligible in absence of holding Bridge Course certificate for the purpose of their appointment of Primary/Upper Primary School Teachers after amendment being made in R. 266(3) of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, vide notification dt. 28.06.2006.3. Necessary facts relevant for adjudication being almost common, are being taken note of CWP-7024/2007. Advertisement was issued by Rajasthan Public Service Commission ('PSC' on 30.10.2006 inviting application for appointment of Primary and Upper Primary Teachers. Petitioner (Radhe Shyam Raidas) qualified Senior Secondary (Vocational), B.A., M.A. & Diploma in Education (two years) Course from Bhopal (MP) as alleged to be equivalent to BSTC duly recognized by Rajasth...
Shri Nirmal Kumar Dugar S/O Late Shri Dhan Raj Dugar Vs. Bhanwar Lal A ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3601
ORDERNarendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that plaintiff-appellant Nirmal Kumar Dugar filed a suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent in respect of rented premise, against defendant-respondent Bhanwar Lal alias Bhonri Lal on the grounds of default in making the payment of monthly rent and denial of title. During the pendency of the suit, the sole defendant Bhanwar Lal died and his legal heir i.e. his son Narendra Kumar Saini was substituted in his place. A notice of the application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC was served upon the legal representative of deceased defendant but legal representative did not appear in spite of service of summon, therefore, ex-parte order was passed against him in the case. The plaintiff examined PW-1 Nirmal Kumar and PW-2 J.P. Saxena. The trial court recorded a finding that the defendant committed default in making the payment of rent but he is entitled to get the benefit of first ...
Bhagwati (Smt.) Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR513]; RLW2008(4)Raj3646
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed by daughter of a government servant late Smt. Bhagwati, who was working on the post of Constable in the Police Department substantively.3. The petitioner's mother late Bhagwati was charge-sheeted under Rule 16 of the CCA Rules to remain willful absent from duty during the period of suspension for 37 days in different years. In pursuance of the charge-sheet issued to the mother of the petitioner, an enquiry was conducted and finally the enquiry officer gave its finding that there is sufficient evidence with regard to misconduct committed by mother of petitioner to remain willful absent from duties. Upon the said enquiry conducted by the Dy. Superintendent of Police (Traffic), Jodhpur, mother of the petitioner was penalized with the penalty of removal from service. Against the said order of removal dated 31.12.2005, an appeal was preferred under Rule 23 of the CCA Rules before the Inspecto...
Basanti Devi Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj938
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner has submitted this habeas corpus petition alleging that her son is in the custody of her father-in-law i.e., in custody of grand-father of the child. After narrating the facts, which we shall be referring in detail herein below, she pleaded that respondent-grand-gather of the child be directed to produce the petitioner's son before this Court and custody of the child may be handed over to the petitioner.3. Facts leading to this petition are as under:As per the facts stated in this habeas corpus petition after marriage of the petitioner with Niranjan Singh on 2nd Dec, 2003, her husband Niranjan Singh committed suicide on 22nd Oct., 2007. On the basis of suicide note, the case under Section 174 Cr.P.C. was registered. According to the petitioner, thereafter, on 23rd Nov., 2007 she gave a registered notice to her father-in-law Madhav Singh and demanded custody of her son Raja @ Jeet Singh. The petitioner also d...
Guneshgar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1191
Deo Narayan Thanvi, J.1. These are two separate appeals, one filed by Guneshgar and the other by Rukmana Ram against the judgment of the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Jodhpur dated 17.7.06, whereby both the accused appellants were convicted for the offence Under Section 8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter referred-to as 'the Act' and sentenced to ten years' R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. one lac and in default, to further undergo one year's S.I.2. Facts leading to these appeals are that on 25.5.05 at 3 P.M., when the SHO Ramchandra of Police Station, Dhorimanna, District Barmer, was patrolling with other police staff in Govt. jeep being No. RJ04C1781 & intercepting the vehicles for checking at Meethda Phanta on National highway No. 15, at 5 PM they saw one Tata Sumo with black glasses, which were closed, coming from the side of Gandharv. On suspicion, they tried to stop the vehicle but the driver on seeing the police party, rushed the vehicle...
V.K. Sarda, Vr. C. (Brigadier Retd.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(3)Raj2398
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Brigadier (Retd.) V.K. Sarda, recipient of Veer Chakra, has approached this Court with the prayer that a mandamus be issued to the respondents to grant him disability pension with effect from 1.3.1997 and the letters dated 14.7.1998, 7.6.2000 and 9.5.2002 refusing to grant his disability pension, be set aside and the respondents be pension alongwith interest at the rate of 24% per annum.2. The petitioner joined National Defence Academy on 1.1.1959 and was granted Commission on 11.12.1962 in the rank of Second Lieutenant in medical category-A. He was promoted to the Rank of Lieutenant, Captain, Major, Lieutenant Colonel, Colonel and Brigadier. During his service tenure, petitioner served both in the field and operational areas. He participated in Indo-Pak conflicts of 1965 and 1971. He was for his services rendered to the nation decorated with Poorvi Star, Paschimi Star, Raksha Medal, Sainya Seval with clasps Jammu and Kashmir & West Bengal, Ucchan Tunga Medal, 25th...
Sunil Kumar and ors. Vs. Praveen Chand Chowardia and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Raj179; RLW2008(4)Raj3605
ORDERNarpndra Kumar Jain, J.1. Admit, Mr. Mandhana appears for contesting respondent No. 1. The service of respondent No. 2 is dispensed with.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. This writ petition on behalf of defendants is directed against the impugned order dated 19-2-2007 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No. 1, Beawar. District Ajmer, whereby their application for setting aside the ex parte order dated 11-9-2006 has been rejected.4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that plaintiff-respondent No. 1 instituted a suit for eviction against defendant-petitioners on different grounds. The suit was contested by defendants by filing written statement. The issues were framed in the case. The plaintiff's evidence was concluded on 6-7-2006 and thereafter the case was fixed for defendants' evidence. The affidavits of D.W. 1 Sunil Kumar and D.W. 2 Radhey Shyam were filed. The case was fixed on 11-9-2006. On that day, neither the defendants nor their counsel was pres...
inder Singh Rajpurohit Vs. R.S.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj951
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. This writ petition is one of the glaring example of disobedience of the orders passed by this Court. The petitioner is repeatedly knocking the doors of this Court for redressal of his grievance. In this writ petition, petitioner is. challenging the impugned order of termination dated 1.12.1983 (Annexure 3), order dated 22.2.1984 (Annexure 5) and the order dated 28.6.2006 (Annexure 19) and prayed that the respondent Corporation may be directed to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Driver with all consequential benefits along with full back wages.2. According to the facte of the case, initially the petitioner was appointed under the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation on the post of driver in the year 1978 after due selection and continued on the said post till 1.12.1983. The respondent No. 3 issued a charge-sheet on 7.12.1982 against the petitioner alleging therein the charge with regard to accident due to rash and negligent driving and causing loss ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »