Rajasthan Court May 2010 Judgments
Executive Officer, Nagar Palike Mandal Vs. State Consumer Disputes Red ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-2010
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. Counsel submits that the matter was initially taken up at the Consumer Forum, however, attained finality after the decision passed by the National Commission upholding the order passed by the state Commission dt. 30/11/2006 (Anx.2). The operative part of the order of the State Commission, which is relevant for the present purpose, is reproduced here as under:mijksDr foospu ds vk/kkj ij vihykFkhZ dh vihy vkaf'kd :i ls Lohdkj dh tkus ;ksX; gS A vr% vihykFkhZ dh vihy vkaf'kd :i ls Lohdkj dh tkrh gS rFkk vyksP; vkns'k fnukad 15-05-1998 fuEu izdkj la'kksf/kr fd;k tkrk gS&1- izR;FkhZ&foi;{kh ^^ifjoknh& vihykFkhZ dks clUr fcgkj ;kstuk esa Mh&134] Mh&143] Mh&145] Mh&216] Mh&235 esa ls ,d Hkw[k.M mlh dher ij vkaofVr djsxk] tks dher foi{kh us ifjoknh ls iwoZ esa vkaofVr IykV la[;k ,&14 gsrq 833-3 oxZxt ds fy, olwy dh FkhA2- bl izdj.k esa izR;FkhZ vihykFkhZ ls 833-3 oxZxt ls vf/kd nh tk jgh Hkwfe dh dher dks vkt ls vkjf{kr nj ls olwy djsxkA3- ifjoknh&vihykFkhZ; }kjk fnukad 04-0...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Aditya Atreya and ors., Vs. Raj. University of Health Science and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-2010
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. While admitting the writ petitions prayer for interim relief was rejected vide orders dt. 07/04/2010 & 23/04/2010 - against which Special Appeal No. 302/2010 (Gopal Maheshwari and Ors. v. Raj. University of Health Sciences, State and Anr.) was preferred while deciding, it was observed to dispose of writ petition finally looking to nature of urgency involved herein but because of paucity of time, it is not possible to finally dispose of .2. Taking note of (supra), 2nd stay Appl. Nos. 622/2010 in CWP-4500/2010 and 2nd Stay Appl. 1279/2010 in CWP-5068/2010 have been moved. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that similar controversy was raised before principal seat at Jodhpur in CWP 3914/2010 (Dr. Khushwant & Dr. Ramesh Khatri v. State and Ors.) wherein after hearing Counsel for the parties, interim order dt. 24/05/2010 has been passed observing ad infra: -9. Subject to said process being undertaken and completed by the competent authority of the State Gover...
Tag this Judgment!Mangi Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-2010
Kailash Chandra Joshi, J.1. By the instant D.B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal, the appellant-accused has assailed the judgment and order dated 19-7-2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Jalore (for short, 'the trial Court' hereinafter) in Sessions Case No. 95/2003 (4/2003), whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 302, 364 and 201 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one year's simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC; seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 364 IPC; and three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo four months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 201 IPC.2. The factual matrix of the case, in a nut shell, is that on 28.12.200...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-2010
Kailash Chandra Joshi, J.1. This criminal appeal preferred by appellant Gopal Lal S/o Bheru Lal, by caste Pareek, resident of Gegas, Police Station Mandal (Bhilwara) is directed against the judgment and sentence dated 27.01 .2 004 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 1 54/2003.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 09.01 .2003 at 12.05 p.m. information was received by Pramod Sharma (P.W.20), Station House Officer, Police Station Mandal, regarding suspicious death of Bherulal S/o Chhoga Pareek. After receiving the above information, P.W.20 Pramod Sharma went to Village Gegas where accused appellant Gopal S/o Bherulal presented a written report stating therein that in the evening of 08.01 .2003 at about 4-5 p.m. his father Bherulal brought two oxen from 'Bada' to 'Gawadi'. At that time both the oxen started fighting with each other and his father intervened to stop them and during that he sustained injuries including t...
Tag this Judgment!Chhagan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-27-2010
Govind Mathur, J.1. By judgment impugned dated 11.2.2004 learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Pratapgarh convicted the accused appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life term with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and further to undergo six months simple imprisonment in event of default in payment of fine.2. The prosecution case, as unfolded in the judgment impugned, is that on 14.1.2003 one Tulsiram son of Khumanji reported at Police Station Dungla that about 19 years earlier marriage of his sister Smt. Nathi was solemnized with Chhagan Lal son of Fatehlal resident of Dungla. Smt. Nathi was regularly ill- treated by Chhagan Lal, thus, she remained at her maternal house for about six months and being consoled and advised by certain responsible persons she returned to her husband. Smt. Nathi was brought to her brother's house at Kankarwa at about a month earlier due to the beating given by Chhagan Lal, then ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Paliwal and ors. Vs. Hindustan Zinc Limited and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-27-2010
Prakash Tatia, J.1. In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 236/1984, following question has been referred to the Larger Bench by the order dated 16.12.2005 passed by the Division Bench of this Court headed by the then Hon'ble Chief Justice and one of us (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prakash Tatia):Whether Hindustan Zinc Limited is 'State' or 'any other authority' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India ?2. The facts of the case of D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 236/1984 are that the petitioner, an employee of the respondent-Company, appointed in the year 1968, faced disciplinary proceedings wherein order of termination of his service was passed on 23.12.1983 (Annex.31) which was challenged by the petitioner by preferring S.B. Writ Petition No. 236/1984 before the single bench of this Court on 11.1.1984. According to the petitioner, the respondent Hindustan Zinc Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, is Government of India Enterprise and is an instrumentality o...
Tag this Judgment!Nijamuddeen and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan Through Pp
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-26-2010
ORDERM.N. Bhandari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.2. Learned Counsel for petitioners submits that Salamuddin has already been granted bail under Section 438 CrPC by the court below and main allegations exist against him only. Bail application of the present petitioners has been rejected only on the ground of it is a second bail application under Section 438 CrPC. Otherwise, case of the petitioners is on better footing than Salamuddin. Looking to the aforesaid, petitioners may be granted bail.3. On the other hand, learned PP has opposed the bail application.4. After taking into consideration rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, which may otherwise affect outcome of the trial, but looking to the facts of this case, I am inclined to allow this bail application under Section 438 CrPC.5. Therefore, the SHO/I0 of the Police Station - Nasirabad, District - Ajmer is directed that in the event ...
Tag this Judgment!Pappu Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-26-2010
Govind Mathur, J.1. By judgment impugned dated 6.9.2003, learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Jodhpur convicted the accused appellants and sentenced them in following terms:Accused Pappu Ram:Under Sections 302, 323/34 IPC - imprisonment for life term with a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.Under Section 4/25 Arms Act - one year's rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo fifteen days rigorous imprisonment.Accused Madanlal, Smt. Bhanwari and Dilip:Under Sections 302/34, 323/34 IPC - imprisonment for life term with a fine of Rs. 200/- each and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.Under Section 323/34 IPC - six months' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo fifteen days rigorous imprisonment.2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that on 12.1....
Tag this Judgment!Sardara and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-25-2010
C.M. Totla, J.1. Appellants are convicted and sentenced as under - (A) appellant Sardara, son of Harman (i) for Section 302 IPC - life imprisonment plus fine Rs. 2,000/-, in default - six months rigorous imprisonment, (ii) Section 394 IPC - seven years rigorous imprisonment plus fine Rs. 1,000/-, in default - three months rigorous imprisonment, (iii) Section 25 Arms Act - three years rigorous imprisonment plus fine Rs. 500/-, in default - two months' rigorous imprisonment, (B) appellant Chhotu @ Chhotiya, son of Prabhulal, (i) for Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC - life imprisonment plus fine Rs. 2,000/-, in default - six months rigorous imprisonment, (ii) Section 394 IPC - seven years' rigorous imprisonment plus fine Rs. 1,000/-, in default - three months rigorous imprisonment, (C) appellant Harman @ Urariya, son of Uda @ Udaram, (i) Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC - life imprisonment plus Rs. 2,000/- fine, (ii) Section 25 Arms Act - three years rigorous imprisonment plus Rs....
Tag this Judgment!C.P. Joshi Vs. Kalyan Singh Chouhan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-24-2010
Prakash Tatia, J.1. After framing of the issues on 5.5.2010 in this election petition, the respondent submitted this application on 11.5.2010, being IA No. 6839/2010 and prayed for summoning of the following documents:(1) Marked Copy of Electoral Roll relating to the Polling Station No. 68.(2) Marked Copy of Electoral Roll relating to the Polling Station No. 124.(3) Marked Copy of Electoral Roll relating to the Polling Station No. 192.(4) Register of Voters in Form No. 17-A relating to the Polling Station No. 68.(5) Register of Voters in Form No. 17-A relating to the Polling Station No. 124.(6) Register of Voters in Form No. 17-A relating to the Polling Station No. 192.(7) List of Tendered Votes in Form No. 17-B relating to the Polling Station No. 68.(8) List of Tendered Votes in Form No. 17-B relating to the Polling Station No. 124.(9) List of Tendered Votes in Form No. 17-B relating to the Polling Station No. 192.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. The respondent in the appli...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »