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.
Nahar Singh and anr. Vs. Kastoori and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(4)Raj3094; 2009(3)WLN319
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By this second appeal filed under Section 100, C.P.C. the appellants have challenged the validity of impugned judgment and decree dt. 25.04.2006 passed by the Addl. District Judge No. 1, Bhilwara in Civil Appeal No. 108/2004, whereby, judgment and decree dt. 11.10.2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gangapur in Civil Suit No. 25/97 has been upheld.2. Brief facts of the case indicate that the appellant-plaintiffs filed suit for cancellation of sale-deed, declaration and injunction on 15.04.1997 before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gangapur. In the suit, it was prayed that sale-deed executed by respondent No. 1 in favour of respondent No. 2 dt. 19.04.1996 for property in question may be quashed and set aside and it may be declared that there was No right in favour of respondent No. 1 to sell the property in question in favour of the respondent No. 2. It is further prayed that by a decree of permanent injunction, the respondents may be restraine...
Naterpal Singh and ors. Vs. District and Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganaga ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)WLN206
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The Authority under the Payment of Wages Act by order dt. 09.06.2000 allowed the claim of the applicants-petitioners holding that the applicants-petitioners worked for respondent-non-applicant and the applicants were agricultural labourer. The Authority under the Payment of Wages Act held that the applicants-petitioners are entitled wages as well as the penalty. The workmen Netrapal, Parikshit and Smt. Shakuntala were held entitled to wages 17,000/-, 24,000/- and 19,200/- respectively with penalty of Rs. 1,000/- each.3. Being aggrieved against the said order passed by the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act dt. 09.09.2000, the respondent preferred appeal, which was decided by the learned District Judge, Sri Ganganagar vide order dt. 21.04.2004. The appeal was allowed only on the ground that since the claimants were agricultural labourer, therefore, they were not covered under the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act an...
Bhagwati Lal Vs. Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technol ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)WLN311
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is claiming relief of third selection grade and that has been denied by the respondents merely on the ground that according to the respondents, the petitioner yet is not a regularly appointee.3. The facts which are not in dispute are that the petitioner was originally appointed on ad hoc basis. Then, he completed 9 years service when he was given benefit of first selection grade and after completion of 18 years, he was given second selection grade. When the petitioner sought third selection grade after completion of 27 years of service, it is said that the petitioner is not regular appointee and as per circular of the Government dt. 17.02.1998, the petitioner cannot be given third selection grade.4. Learned Counsel for the respondent University vehemently submitted that the first and second selection grades were given to the petitioner wrongly as he was not a regular appointee and, therefore, he was not entitle...
Gopal Prasad Varshney Vs. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: (2009)IVLLJ225Raj; RLW2009(3)Raj2029; 2009(3)WLN571
K.S. Rathore, J.1. Petitioner Gopal Prasad Varshney was appointed on the post of Clerk in the respondent Bank on 23.01.1965 after giving age relaxation of two and half years in view of his additional qualification and retired from the post of Senior Manager on attaining age of superannuation on 31.07.1995. The pension scheme was introduced in the Banking Industry in November, 1993. The respondent Bank also framed its own employees pension regulation in 1993. The total service of the petitioner with the respondent Bank was 31 years, whereas for 100% pension 33 years service is required and for short of 2 years service, the petitioner wanted to take the benefit of Rule 26(c) of The Bank of Rajasthan Limited (Employees') Pension Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Rules of 1996') as prior to the service with the respondent Bank, the petitioner had served in the Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation for the period from 01.08.1959 to 09.01.1965. To this effect, the petitioner submitted his repre...
Rajesh Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(4)Raj2873
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. At the request of learned Counsel for the parties, the final arguments were heard and writ petition is being disposed of finally.2. The father of the petitioner late Shri Ram Sharan died on 2nd February, 1999 after serving the respondent-Department for about 27 1/2 years. Since he died while in service, therefore, the petitioner being his legal heir filed an application for compassionate appointment in place of his father with the consent of other legal heirs. The application of the petitioner was examined/considered by the Circle Selection Committee on 18th September, 2001. The observation of Committee was that ex-employee had left the four members viz. Widow and three sons. All the sons are major; the applicant is also married; the family has own house to live in at Jaipur; the family received the admissible terminal benefits to the tune of Rs. 1,49,207/- and the widow is getting family pension of Rs. 1750 + DR P.M.; there are no specific social liabilities ...
Rahul Gupta and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(4)Raj2967
Raghuvendra S. Rathore, J.1. On apprehension of their arrest, the petitioners have come to this Court for seeking pre-arrest bail by filing this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The matter relates to a matrimonial dispute between the members of Indian Civil Services. The petitioner No. 1 is a member of Indian Civil Services of 2004 batch. Likewise the complainant is a member of 2005 batch. An introduction between the parties during the earlier period of training had seen the friendship blossom, which culminated into solemnization of marriage between the two on 17.09.2005, in accordance to Arya Samaj riots. The friendship between the parties, which had led to a tie of marriage within a short span of time, showed breaking of the same in an equally short period when a divorce petition came to be filed by the petitioner in the month of September, 2008 and the instant First Information Report came to be filed by the other side, simultaneously on 24.09.2008.2. A brief reference to the f...
A.C.T.O. Vs. Jodhpur Gases
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: (2009)12VatReporter52
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. Instant sales tax revision petition has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner, Special Circle-I, Jodhpur against the judgment and order dated 13.5.2008 passed by the Tax Board, Ajmer in Appeal No. 804/07/Jodhpur, whereby, the learned Tax Board has affirmed the judgment dated 18.12.2006 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes, Jodhpur, whereby, the first appellate authority set aside the additional demand of tax/surcharge and interest for the difference amount of 4 per cent of tax which is created on the ground that as per Entry No. 176 of the notification dated 22.3.2003, 12% tax is leviable upon oxygen and industrial gases.2. Earlier, in pursuance of tax assessment order dated 7.3.2005, the respondent dealer deposited tax and surcharge at the rate of 8 per cent for the year 2002-03; but, later on, demand was created for the difference amount of 4% tax and surcharge and interest on the ground that as per notfn issued by the Government o...
Zorawal Mal Vs. Lrs. of Sri Kishan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: RLW2009(4)Raj3145
Prakash Tatia, J. 1. This D.B. Civil Special Appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.2.1991 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 26/1977, whereby the learned Single Judge reversed the judgment and decree dated 28.2.1977 passed by the court of Addl. District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff filed in exercise of his right for pre-emption.2. As per the facts pleaded in the plaint and in further and better particulars submitted in the trial court on the direction issued by the trial court vide order dated 8.2.1974, the original ancestor of the plaintiff was Roop Raj Bora. His son was Fateh Ram Bora. Fateh Ram Bora had three sons-Har Narayan, Narsingh Das and Ram Narayan. Thereafter, it has been stated in further and better particulars that Har Narayan and Narsingh Das got the house from Fateh Ram. How it came to two sons of Fateh Ram and what happened to...
Chandarya and anr. Vs. Mohan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)WLN56
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition has been against the order passed by Assistant Collector and Acting City Magistrate Lalsot dt. 30.04.1992 by which declaratory suit filed by the petitioners was dismissed as having abated and the order of the Board of Revenue dt. 30.10.2000 by which appeal of the respondents was allowed and the order of the Revenue Appellate Authority 30.08.1994 by which order of Assistant Collector and Acting City Magistrate Lalsot was set-aside, was reversed.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that petitioners when they originally filed suit for declaratory relief, Mohan, Bheru and Kalyan have themselves applied for becoming the party under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. Initially, petitioners contended that Bheru died issueless and his wife also died therefore no legal heirs were required to be impleaded. But when they filed appeal for temporary injunction, against the order passed by the Assistant Collector and Acting City Magistrate Lalsot, they impleade...
Ajaib Singh Vs. Tehsildar (Revenue) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)WLN140
Sangeet Lodha, J.1. This writ petition is directed against notice dt. 22.05.1997 issued by the Tehsildar(Revenue), Raisinghnagar under the provisions of Rajasthan Agriculture Credit Operation(Removal of Difficulties) Act, 1974 (in short 'the Act of 1974' hereinafter) whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 2,03,680/- plus interest outstanding against the loan advanced by the respondent Bank.2. The validity of the notice is assailed by the petitioner primarily on the ground that before taking recourse to recovery proceedings through sale of immovable property, the Prescribed Authority was under an obligation to determine the liability after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to raise objections about the amount claimed to be due from him to the Bank.3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that before issuing notice and determining the amount due, no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to raise objections to the claim made by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »