Rajasthan Court March 2009 Judgments
Ramlal (Died) Through Lr and ors. Vs. Girdharlal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-25-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Raj25; RLW2009(4)Raj2960
Jitendra Ray Goyal, J.1. This is a defendants' second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short the Code) filed against the judgment and decree dated 12/11/1992 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Bayana in Civil Appeal No. 2/1986 whereby the judgment and final decree for redemption of mortgage passed in Civil Suit No. 6/1969 by the learned Munsif, Bayana on 15/9/1983 in favour of the plaintiffmortgagors was affirmed.2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondents filed a suit on 2/1/1969 against the defendants for redemption of mortgage of a house situated at Rudawal. The trial court passed the contested preliminary decree on 12/1/1978 in favour of all the plaintiffs and directed them to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,000/- into the court within a period of one month which was found due upon them. The plaintiffs deposited the said amount into the court within the stipulated period. Thereafter on 17/11/1981 the plaintiffs applied for passing of fi...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Mohini Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-25-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)WLN186
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The short questions involved in these appeals are whether the appellant insurance company was rightly held to pay the interest over the compensation amount awarded by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Bhilwara in award dt. 29.08.2007? and if the insurance company is held to be liable, then from which day, the appellant is liable And lastly whether the increase of interest rate in case of default in payment can be justified?3. Both the learned Counsels for the parties submit that the issues have already been answered by the Hon'ble Apex Court the first two are answered by the judgment delivered in the case of Kamla Chaturvedi v. National Insurance Co. and Ors. reported in MACD 2009 (SC) 4, wherein it has been held that the insurance company is liable to pay not only the principal amount of compensation payable by the insured employer but also the interest thereon if ordered by the Commissioner to be paid by the insured ...
Tag this Judgment!University of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Gopal Sharan Gupta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: (2010)ILLJ216Raj; RLW2009(3)Raj2432
Ashok Parihar, J.1. The respondent, concerned employee was initially appointed as a Research Assistant on a consolidated salary of Rs. 1200/- per month w.e.f. 1.1.1991 vide order dated 16.1.1991 in the Center for Rajasthan Studies under University of Rajasthan. Subsequently, a regular advertisement was also issued for appointment for the post of Research Assistant in the Study Center on a consolidated salary of Rs. 1200/- per month. In pursuance to the advertisement dated 17.2.1991 the concerned employee was given appointment on the post of Research Assistant vide order dated 26.4.1991. The relevant portion of the order dated 26.04.1991 is reproduced as under:With reference to your letter No. 772 dated 2.4.91, on the above subject, I am directed to convey the approval of the Vice Chancellor for the appointment of Shri Gopal Saran Gupta as Research Asstt. @ Rs. 1200/- p.m. (fixed) on the following terms and conditions:(i) If the services of the incumbent are continued beyond 240 days. Y...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Chandra Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4168; RLW2009(4)Raj2842
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. Aggrieved by the sanction order for prosecution order dated 21.4.1994 - the petitioner has challenged the same by way of this writ petition.2. The brief facts of the case are that in 1961, the petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer in the Irrigation Department. Subsequently, he joined the military transport services. But in December 1966, he came back to the Irrigation Department as an Assistant Engineer. In 1979, he was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer. In 1982, he was posted as a Liason and Procurement Officer in the Rajasthan Canal Project which was later on renamed as Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojana. He was posted in Delhi from 1982 to 1987. The petitioner claims that in 1993 he learnt that a FIR was lodged under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, at Bikaner, relating to purchase of some material which was made in the year 1984 from M/s. Manju Shri Enterprises, Bikaner, According to the petitioner, he was not named in the FIR. He furt...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Ahmad Ali Razvi and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-24-2009
Reported in: RLW2010(1)Raj624
Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.1. The petitioners Sayed Ahmad Ali Razvi and Sayed Irfan Ali Razvi filed this revision petition against the order dated April 20, 2000 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1 Ajmer in Case No. 262 of 1992 framing charge against them for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 468 and 120 B IPC. As the revision petition was not traceable, the record of S.B. Cr. Revision Petition No. 286 of 2000 was reconstituted vide order of this Court dated September 9, 2009. The learned Counsel for the petitioner No. 1 informed that Sayed Ahmad Ali Razvi, petitioner No. 1 died.2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant non-petitioner Sayed Raze Ali Razvi on January 13, 1980 lodged FIR at Police Station Kotwali Ajmer, which was registered at No. 5 of 1980 under Section 420 IPC against the accused petitioners. As per this report the complainant submitted that his father Alhaz Sayed Hussain Ali Razvi Vakil Zavra died on November 25, 1967 at Ajmer. He was Kalid Bardar and...
Tag this Judgment!Ganpati Diagnostic Centre Vs. State of Raj and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-23-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(3)Raj1976
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By way of filing the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-firm is challenging the order dated 8.8.2008 Annexure-13 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner in Civil Case No. 214/2008 whereby the trial Court decided the application fried under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of CPC filed by the respondent No. 4 - EMKAY Medicare Services, so also the order dated 12.2.2009 passed by District Judge, Bikaner in appeal No. 92/2008 filed by the petitioner-firm against the order dated 8.8.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner.2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 invited tendered for package of diagnostic machines to install at PBM Hospital, Bikaner pertaining to MRI Machine and CT Scan Machine. The petitioner along with certain other persons and private respondent No. 4 submitted their tenders. The first tender notice was issued on 2...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Narayan Vs. Civil Judge (Jd) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)WLN38
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner/defendant put in appearance before the trial Court on 08.11.2005 and on the same day, submitted an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC which was rejected by the trial Court on 21.08.2006 and the case was fixed for further proceedings, instead of passing any order that what for the case has been fixed. On 28.08.2006, the petitioner submitted written statement and on the same day, the plaintiff submitted an application under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC obviously for passing the decree and objecting to the petitioner filing written statement after delay. This application under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC remained pending upto 20.04.2007 and on 20.04.2007, the trial Court ordered taking out of the record the written statement filed by the petitioner/defendant. Hence, this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner.3. It is clear from the facts mentioned above that the petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 1...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Kumar Dhandu Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(3)Raj2616
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In all the above writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking direction for quashing impugned election notice dated 27.02.2009 of Chairman and, it is, further, prayed that in the alternative the impugned notice may be kept in abeyance and a mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to abide by the mandate of law and conduct the election of Ward Member of the vacant seat before the election of Chair-person.2. In all the above writ petitions, the election of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Rawatsar/Sojat/Nokha is under challenge; more specifically, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1836/2009, Prem Kumar Dhandu v. State and Ors. and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3260/2009, Hanuman Prasad v. State and Ors. the petitioners are residents of Ward No. 14 and they are challenging the election of Chairman of Municipal Board, Rawatsar which has fallen vacant due to resignation of the Chair-person Abhishek Matoria, who has become Member of the Legislative Assembly. In ...
Tag this Judgment!Jagmal Singh Yadav and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(4)Raj3124
Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J. 1. This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners, Major Jagmal Singh Yadav and Ram Balak Patel, against the order dated Feb. 6, 2009 of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 4 Deeg Bharatpur in Sessions Case No. 64 of 2008 whereby the trial court framed charges under Sections 4/5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 against them petitioner No. 1 is Proprietor of M/s. Jagmal Singh & Corporation and petitioner No. 2 is employee in the said firm. The said firm is a license holder firm bearing licence No. E/NC/HN/22/13 (E-10019) HN-159/E which was issued by the Chief Explosive Controller, Northern Region, Faridabad (Haryana) and is dealing in providing explosive for the use of mines in the country. For using explosive under the aforesaid license, the petitioner established site project office at village Luhesar, Tehsil Kaman, District Bharatpur and sought permission to use explosive in the mines at Kaman by to Chief controller of Explosive. As per...
Tag this Judgment!Abhishek SaIn and ors. Vs. Raj. University of Health Sc. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(4)Raj3527
Prem Shanker Asopa, J.BY THE COURT1. Since common questions of fact and law relating to not operating the waiting list of RPMT-2008 and giving admissions in M.B.B.S. only on the basis of PC-PMT of BDS as well as 10+2 are involved in all these writ petitions, therefore, all the aforesaid writ petitions have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided together.2. By these writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to consider and give admission to the petitioners in MBBS Course in Geetanjali Medical College and Hospital by considering their candidature against the available 85% seats of 150 seats for their admission in MBBS on the basis of their respective merit in RPMT-2008 by holding counselling and further no person be admitted against the aforesaid seats from any other source except the RPMT-2008. In order to better appreciate the aforesaid issue involved in the matter, the leading facts have been taken f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »