Rajasthan Court September 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.
Anukampa Avas Vikas Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(3)Raj2295
Prem Shanker Asopa, J.1. By the instant writ petition, the petitioners have initially prayed for a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof restraining the respondents from interfering in the peaceful possession of the. petitioners and further restraining them from taking any action to dispossess the petitioners from the property in question situated at S-l, Poultry Farm, Ajmer Road, Jaipur measuring 7000 Sq. Metres. The petitioners have also prayed for payment of Rs. 50,000/- as damages for breaking down the entry gate in question and causing mental harassment.2. On disclosure of the fact that vide order dated 4.3.2006 the lease deed dated 17.10.2005 which was duly registered on 18.10.2005, as corrected on 19.1.2006, has been cancelled and the amount of Rs. 1,93,08,001/- was also refunded vide Cheque No. 770731 and the possession was also taken and further when the petitioners refused to receive the same then the order was affixed at ...
Devi Lal Sahu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj38
Krishan Vyas, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 10.11.2003 passed by Summary Security Force Court (hereinafter, for short 'the SSF Court') which was further confirmed vide order dated 1.12.2003 by the D.I.G. B.S.F. Barmer and the order dated 21-22.9.2004 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.2. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner is that he was substantively working in B.S.F. since 5.9.1986 and served the respondent Department with utmost sincerity and dedication. During his service tenure, he received cash rewards from I.G. B.S.F., 9 Commendation Rewards from the D.I.G. And 10 from Commandant. As per the facts of the case, till 2003 only two punishments were inflicted against him with regard to absence without leave and over staying on leave and till 2003 his service record was unblemished and there is no charge against the petitioner for committing any offence involving moral turpitude3. Accor...
Chetan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj28
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This appeal is against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 5.2.2005 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Pali Headquarter Jaitaran in Sessions case No. 98/2004 whereby the appellant Chetan Lal has been convicted for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and in, alternative under Section 149 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.2. Hence, this appeal has been preferred by the sole convict appellant Chetan Lal.3. The entire case of the prosecution as set up is that complainant Bhanwar Lal, Ramsukh along with Madan Ram on 29.1.2001 at 2:30 A.M gave parcha bayan Ex.P/1 at Police Station, Raipur (Camp) alleging that he along with his maternal uncle's grandson - Jagdish were going on a scooter and when they reached near Paladiya well, ...
Pushpa Devi Vs. Motl Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj322
ORDERThe matter comes on the objection filed on behalf of the petitioner on 26.5.2007 objecting to paras 2 to 7 and 16 of the affidavit of Moti Lal. Thereupon the Dy. Registrar (Judl.) has directed the case to be put up before the Court.The objection is raised in the back ground of the earlier order passed by thit Court on 22.9.2004, wherein it has been held that since this is a probate proceeding, and the question of title of the property Cannot be gone into, therefore, the facts relating to title of the property were found to be irrelevant, and they were found to be not capable of being taken on record.It is contended that the above paras of the affidavit do contain these very facts, which in view of the order dated 22.92004 cannot be taken on record.Learned Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that if the property did not belong to the testator and if the probate is granted with respect to the Will, that would affect the title of the property, and therefore, the av...
Hari Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj904
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The present criminal appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 5.2.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beawar, whereby the accused-appellants have been convicted under Section 8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act of 1985') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each.2. Briefly stated that facts of the case are. That on 3.6.2003 at about 10.00 p.m., Durga Prasad, ASI along with police party of Police Station Beawar was on patrolling as per the direction of the Superintendent of Police. He carried out vNakabandi' near Chungi-Naka of Masuda Road, Ajmer. During 'Nakabandi', they were informed by the Police Station Beawar City on wireless that one truck bearing No. RJ-19/G-3381 is coming from the side of Ashapura Temple carrying some bags containing contraband in it...
Bhanwar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1085
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment & order of learned Additional Sessions Judge Baran dated 10.2.1986 thereby convicting the appellant-appellants No. 1 and 2 Bhanwar Singh and Parmanand for offence under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing each of them with rigorous imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in case of default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Accused-appellant No. 3 Kanhaiya Lal though was convicted for offence Under Section 323 r/w. Section 34 IPC but he was released on probation.2. Shri A.K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the accused-appellants has argued that accused-appellants Bhanwar Singh and Parmanand could not have been convicted for offence under Section 326 IPC because the evidence that has been produce does not prove such charge against them beyond reasonable doubt. Two witnesses namely; PVV-14 Shivcharan and PW-15 Sajjan Bai, who were the independent...
Pankaj, Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1568
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The roars of gun fire echoed inside the sugarcane juice's shop on March 19, 1998 at 11 AM when out of four persons sitting at the shop, one opened fire at Raj Kumar (since dead). The appellants, four in number, were put to trial for having committed murder of Raj Kumar before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Bharatpur. Learned Judge vide judgment dated August 3, 2002 convicted and sentenced them as under:Koshlendra @ Kaushal, Krishna Murti and Jitendra Kumar:Under Section 302/34 IPC:Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. Pankaj:Under Section 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months.Under Section 3/25 Arms Act:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month.Sentences were ordered to run con...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shakuntla and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ220
N.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the insurer, against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal No. 1, Sri Ganganagar, Camp Sri Karanpur dated 22.2.97, passing an award of Rs. 2,21,500 along with 12 per cent interest and further directing that if the amount is not paid within one month, the principal amount shall carry interest at the rate of 18 per cent.2. Necessary facts according to the claim are that on 20.6.1992, the deceased Onkar Dutt was driving the jeep in question, wherein he was carrying ice, as the jeep was hired for carrying ice. When the jeep reached near Chak 10W left rear tyre got burst, with the result that jeep dashed against a tree and overturned. Again with the result that the deceased was crushed between the seat and steering and died in the hospital. The deceased was said to be 38 years of age. The owner submitted his reply pleading that the deceased was working as his employee at a salary of Rs. 1,200 per month apart from liveries and food and wa...
Jaipal Bishnoi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj447
Govind Mathur, J.1. All these petitions for writ raise common legal question, thus, 1 propose to decide all these cases by one common judgment.2. To regulate recruitment and other service conditions in the Rajasthan Prabodhak Service, the Government of Rajasthan, while exercising powers conferred by Section 102 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, enacted the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 2008'). An intention to fill in the existing vacancies of Prabodhaks was notified by the Government of Rajasthan on 31.5.2008. Accordingly, the process of recruitment was initiated in various Districts of the State. The eligibility for appointment as Prabodhaks under the rules of 2008 is as follows:Senior Secondary School certificate or intermediate or its equivalent, with Diploma or certificate in basic teachers training of a duration of not less than two years of Diploma or certificate in elementary teachers, training of a dura...
Bhagwan Singh Vs. Makkhan Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj469
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) has been preferred by the defendant in a suit for specific performance that was decreed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track), Anoopgarh on 24.10.2005. After summoning the record and hearing the counsel for both the parties as the plaintiff-respondent had put appearance in caveat, this appeal was admitted for consideration on 19.02.2007; and execution of the impugned decree was ordered to be stayed and status quo regarding possession was ordered to be maintained with certain clarifications.2. This appeal was again processed by the office for the purpose of preparation of paper-book and a notice was exhibited per Rule 181 of the Rules of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, 1952 ('the Rules' hereafter); and, for the list of documents having not been filed and the initial charges having not been deposited, the matter was listed before the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) and then bef...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »