Rajasthan Court May 2009 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.
The State of Rajasthan Vs. NaraIn Das
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-19-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)WLN124
C.M. Totla, J.1. Assailed is respondent's acquittal for the offence of Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act as per above judgment dt. 21.06.1988.2. Heard learned Public Prosecutor and also learned Counsel for the respondent.3. Brief alleged facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that on 23.04.1979 at 8.30 am, Food Inspector PW 1, in presence of witness PW2, collected sample of ice candy-purchasing the same from the shop/establishment of respondent - the same was sealed in three empty glass bottles as per prescribed procedure - memos and various forms prepared are Exs.P2 to 4-and part of the same was forwarded to Public Analyst for examination and on receipt of analysis report Ex.P-6 doing needful and obtaining sanction Ex.P-7, complaint for the offence of Section 7 read with Section 17 PF Act submitted. Appellant charged for the offence, claimed trial.4. For prosecution, examined are two witnesses Inspector PW 1 and the 'motbir' PW 2, whose signatures are on...
Fauja Singh Vs. Lrs of Bishan Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)WLN103
Sangeet Lodha, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dt. 07.07.1997 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, whereby the revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order dt. 06.05.1992 of Revenue Appellate Authority (in short 'RAA'), Sri Ganganagar setting aside the allotment of the land made in favour of the petitioner vide order dt. 03.12.1990 by the Sub-Divisional Officer (in short 'SDO'), Raisinghnagar, has been affirmed.2. The petitioner was allotted barani land measuring 49.10 bighas comprising Murabba Nos. 238 and 203 in Chak Ramsara Kumaharan, District Sri Ganganagar on temporary cultivation lease in Samvat 2012 i.e. in the year 1955. He applied for the allotment of land on permanent basis. The application was dismissed on 05.06.1976 by the Competent Authority inasmuch as, the petitioner did not appear and produce any evidence in support of his claim. According to the petitioner, he preferred a fresh application for permanent allotment which was...
Shafi Mohammed Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)WLN148
Sangeet Lodha, J.1. In this writ petition, directions are sought against the respondents to hand over the possession of the lands of Square No. 318/400 of Chak 27 APD allotted to the petitioner vide order dt. 06.07.1961.2. The petitioner was allotted lands in Square Nos. 318/400 and 318/401 vide order dt. 06.07.1961 as an Ex-Jagirdar under the orders of Khudkast Commissioner , Rajasthan. The petitioner deposited the requisite amount vide challan dt. 14.03.1969 but the same was not sent by the bank to the office of the Allotting Authority and therefore, allotment made in favour of the petitioner was cancelled vide order dt. 31.03.1977.3. Aggrieved by order dt. 31.03.1977, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissioner Colonisation-cum-Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner which was also dismissed vide order dt. 12.12.1983. The appeal was dismissed on the ground that it was filed by one Shri Ramavatar as a Power of Attorney holder, whereas the Power of Attorney plac...
Dinesh Kumar Panwar Vs. the Chief Election Commissioner and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: RLW2010(1)Raj573; 2009(3)WLN292
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. As per the order issued by the Election Commission of India (Annex-R.2/1), the Commission directed that to conduct free and fair election, a consistent policy is followed to ensure that officers, who are connected with the conduct of elections in the States, do not serve in their home districts or places where they have served for long and decided that no officer connected with elections, directly or indirectly, should be allowed to continue in the present district of posting (a) if she/he is posted in her/his home district and (b) if she/he has completed three years in that district during last 4 years of would be completing 3 years on or before 31.05.2009. The Election Commission directed that the details of action taken obviously by the State Government may be intimated to the Commission for its information immediately and not later than 20.02.2009.3. Following above decision, the Election Commission of India issued direct...
Vijay Singh and ors. Vs. Bhanwar Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)WLN82
N.P. Gupta, J.1. The claimants have filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, being Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand, vide judgment dt. 30.01.1997, awarding a total amount of Rs. 66,290/- by way of compensation, on account of death of one Lal Singh, father of the appellants.2. The necessary facts are, that according to claim petition, on 05.03.1993 the deceased had gone to village Gunjol for some condolence, and at that time, between Kankroli and Nathdwara, near Nirmal Marble factory, the delinquent bus was being driven rashly and negligently, and hit the deceased on the National Highway, as a result of which he died on the spot. First Information Report No. 55/1993 in this regard was registered. 3. According to the claimants the deceased was 55 years of age, and was earning Rs. 2500/- per month from agricultural and dairy farming, out of which he was spending Rs. 300/- on himself, and balance amount was being paid to the...
Jai Raj Singh Chauhan Vs. Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)WLN446
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dt. 14.05.2002, whereby he was dismissed from the post of Chief Inspector (Adventure Sports and Tourism), and the order dt. 15.06.2007 whereby his departmental appeal against the dismissal order was rejected.2. In a nutshell the case of the petitioner is that while the petitioner was working on the said post, on 20.10.1999 he submitted an application for leave for sixty-six days from 27.10.1999 to 31.12.1999. He had to go on leave as his wife was working as a Doctor in Trinidad in West Indies. In the said application, he had clearly mentioned his wife's address in Trinidad. Since the application was forwarded by the Manager, Transport Division, R.T.D.C., Jaipur, therefore, he was under a bona fide impression that the leave prayed by him would be granted. But instead of granting the leave, vide order dt. 02.12.1999, the petitioner was placed under suspension. However, the said order was never served upon the petitioner. Upon his...
Ram Singh Son of Shri Nathu Lal Gurjar Vs. Ram Lal Son of Shri Devi Ra ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)WLN68
Bhanwaroo Khan, J.1. Injured-claimant-appellant has preferred this miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 11.04.2000 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur in claim case No. 976/1999, wherein the total award of compensation amounting to Rs. 85,000/- was passed in his favour.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 07.12.1998 at about 8.30 A.M. the injured-claimant-appellant, as a pillion rider, along with Babu Lal was going-on Scooter bearing RJ-14-7M-1282, a Truck bearing No. RJ-05-G- 0164 being driven by the respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently struck the said Scooter, which resulted into the injury i.e. shortening of half inch of his leg. In the claim petition preferred by the injured-claimant-appellant while awarding the compensation the learned Tribunal has not considered this aspect and has not awarded compensation for shortening of leg. On this ground the present miscellaneous appeal for e...
Manoj Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1680
Prem Shankar Asopa, J.1. Since the common question of facts and law are involved relating to renew the contract of the petitloner(s) for vacant post of GNM/Nurse Grade II considering the fact that they are experience persons and are having more marks and percentage than the selected candidates. All the petitioner(s) have also claimed priority in the select list on the ground that adhoc appointee cannot be substituted by another adhoc fresh appointee, therefore, all the petitions have been heard together and are being decided together.2. Briefly stated the relevant facts of the case are that on 04.05.2007 under the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) a notification inviting application for appointment of 2500 GNM in Sub Health Centres in 24 districts was issued and the appointments were to be made at district level and the candidates of the.respective districts were to be given preference. Then again second advertisement was issued on 08.08.2007 for 6172 GNM post on the same terms and ...
Shree Choudhary Transport Company Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: (2009)225CTR(Raj)125
ORDER1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned order.2. In our view, on the language of Section 194C(2), and the fact that the goods received were sent through truck owners by the appellant, and there was no privity of direct contract between the truck owners and the cement factory. According to the contract between the appellant and the cement factory, it was the appellant's responsibility to transport the cement, and for that the appellant hired the services of the truck owners, obviously as sub-contractors. In that view of the matter, we do not find any error in the impugned order of the Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed summarily....
Abbas Bhai and ors. Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)WLN211
Sangeet Lodha, J.1. This writ petition is directed against order dt. 23.06.2006 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan whereby revision petition preferred by the respondent No. 2 against the order dt. 13.12.2000 passed by the Assistant Collector, Mount Abu in Revenue Suit No. 62/93 has been allowed and consequently, the aforesaid suit filed by the petitioners before the Assistant Collector, Mount Abu has been dismissed as not maintainable.2. The relevant facts in nutshell are that Shri Adam @ Azam son of Shri Jan Mohammed, the father of petitioners No. 1 to 8, purchased agriculture lands measuring 2 bighas and 16 biswas comprising khasra Nos. 516 and 4 biswas comprising khasra No. 517 from one Shri Hira Koli son of Premaji (the father of the respondent No. 1 Babu) by way of registered sale deed dt. 25.02.1970 and possession thereof was handed over to the petitioners No. 1 to 8. Thereafter, Adam @ Azam transferred the land to the petitioners No. 9 to 11 but since, the mutation in the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »