Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR2006Raj128; I(2006)DMC667; RLW2006(1)Raj612; 2006(1)WLC648
V.K. Bali, J. 1. Sudarshan Bhatia, born and brought up in the State of Rajas-than, but stated to be a Canadian citizen, died on 21.4.1989 in Germany leaving behind considerable movable and immovable properties. Poonam Bhati his wife and Smita Bhatia, minor daughters, said to have been born out of the wedlock of Sudarshan Bhatia and Poonam Bhatia, successfully sought succession certificate with regard to the movable properties of deceased Sudarshan Bhatia, details whereof have been given in the application under Section 372 of the Indian succession Act itself as the same was allowed vide orders dated 6.12.1999 passed by the District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur. Whereas Surendra Bhatia brother of Sudarshan Bhatia resisted grant of succession certificate to Poonam Bhati and her daughter Smita on the basis of Will dated 17.4.1989 (Ex.A.l) said to have been executed by Sudarshan Bhati, his sister resisted the same on the ground that movable properties owned by Sudarshan Bhatia were made from...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1971Raj128
Jagat Narayan, C.J. 1. This is an appeal by the State of Rajasthan (defendant No. 2) against a decree of the District Judge, Kota, dated 25-9-58 decreeing a suit instituted against it and against the Union of India (defendant No. 1) by the Associated Stone Industries Kota (hereinafter referred to as the Company). 2. The relevant facts are that the Ruler of the erstwhile State of Kota entered into an agreement Ex. A on 2-5-45 with the Company for quarrying Kachcha stone from the Tehsils of Ramganj Mandi and Chechat. Monopoly rights for quarrying Kachcha stone in these two tehsils were granted to the Company for a period of 15 years from 1-10-44- The terms and conditions contained in Clause 18 (i) of the agreement ran as under :-- 'In consideration of the concessions and privileges granted by the Grantor and in lieu of income-tax, super-tax and excess profits tax, the Grantee covenant to pay to the Grantor royalty on the stone excavated at the rate of rupee one per 100 sq. ft., subject t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1970WLN398
Jagat Narain, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the State of Rajasthan (defendant No. 2) against a decree of the District Judge, Kota, dated 25-9-58 decreeing a suit instituted against it and against the Union of India (defendant No. 1) by the Associated Stone Industries Kota (hereinafter referred to as the Company).2. The relevant facts are that the Ruler of the erstwhile State of Kota entered into an agreement Ex. A on 2-5- 45 with the Company for quarrying Kachcha stone from the Tehsils of Ramganj Mandi and Chochat. Monopoly rights for quarrying Kachcha stone in these two tehsils were granted to the Company for a period of 15 years from 1-10- 44. The terms and conditions contained in Clause 18(1) of the agreement ran as under:In consideration of the concessions and privileges granted by the Grantor and in lieu of income-tax, super tax and excess profits tax, the Grantee convenant to pay to the Grantor royalty on the stone excavated at the rate of rupee one per 100 sq. ft., subjected to th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1961Raj6
Sarjoo Prosad, C.J.1. This is a special appeal against the judgment and decree of Bhandari J, sitting single, confirming in second appeal the decision of the District Judge, Jaipur. Leave to appeal has been granted by the learned Judge.2. The appeal relates to a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent, The Maharaja Kishangarh Mills Ltd., for recovery of Rs. 3539/7/- from the defendant Municipal Committee, which is the appellant here. The plaintiff alleged that the Municipal Committee Madanganj had borrowed on 9-7-1947 a sum of Rs, 3,000/- and agreed to pay interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum, after the loan had been duly sanctioned by the Mahkama Khas of the then Kishangarh State. Later the Municipal Committee Madanganj merged in the Municipal Committee Kishangarh and plaintiff averred that, by virtue of the merger, the defendant became liable to pay the aforesaid amount with interest.The defendant resisted the claim and its liability to pay the amount; but admitted that in any...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :JUDGMENT: S.B.CIVIL MISC.APPEAL NO.917/2011 M/s. Perfect Thread Mills Limited Vs The Competent Authority (Land Acquisition) cum SDO, Girwa & Anr. Date of Judgment ::17. h November 2015 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.K.LOHRA Mr.Manish Singhvi and Mr.Anjay Kothari for the appellant Mr.Akhilesh Rajpurohit and Mr.Vinit Sanadhya for the respondent No.2 NHAI Reportable BY THE COURT: Appellant, a company duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956 has laid this appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act of 1996') to assail the impugned order dated 05.02.2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.3, Udaipur (for short 'the learned court below') as well as the award dated 02.01.2007 rendered by Arbitral Tribunal and the award dated 11.08.2006 passed by the Competent Authority (LA)-cum-Sub Divisional Officer, Girwa insofar as the same relate to compensation for acquisition of l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :JUDGMENT: D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (W) NO.628/2010 IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8736/2008 Arun Singhvi vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai & Ors. Date of Judgment ::04. h November, 2015 PRESENT HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr. N.R. Choudhary, for the appellant. Mr. Jagdish Vyas, for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. ---- BY THE COURT: (PER HON'BLE BHANSALI, J.) REPORTABLE This appeal has been filed by the appellant aggrieved against order dated 29.07.2010 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant seeking to question the validity of Promotion Policy of the respondent New India Assurance Company ('the Company') qua persons with disabilities has been dismissed. The appellant joined the services of the respondent Company on 12.07.1985 on the post of Assistant; whereafter he was promoted on 28.09.2001 on the post of Senior Assistant;...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :JUDGMENT: S.B.CIVIL FIRST APPEAL NO.314/2009 Smt.Shyama Vs Prithvi Singh & Ors. Date of Judgment ::9. h October 2015 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.K.LOHRA Mr.Mahesh Thanvi for the appellant Mr.S.M.Parihar with Mr.Vinay Shrivastava for respondent No.1 Dr.Sachin Acharya for respondent Nos.4 & 5. Reportable BY THE COURT: Unsuccessful in her pursuit for cancellation of adoption deed in favour of the first respondent and partition of property, a biological daughter of late Shivram Tak, the appellant-plaintiff has preferred this first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short CPC). The facts apposite for the purpose of this appeal are that appellant-plaintiff laid a civil suit for partition of the immoveable property, injunction and for declaration of adoption deed dated 16.06.1992 as nullity. By the said adoption deed, late Shivram Tak and his wife Shanti Devi adopted first respondent as their son. At t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :ORDER : 1. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8316/2015 Sukhmandar Singh V/s State of Rajasthan & ORS.2. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5885/2015 Raja Ram & ORS.V/s State of Rajasthan & ORS.Date of Order :: 21.9.2015 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.D.S.Rajvi, for the petitioner/s. Mr.S.M.Toshniwal ) for the respondent/s. Mr.B.S.Sandhu ) ----- BY THE COURT: These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking to question orders dated 18.12.2012 (Annex.4).order dated 3.5.2015 (Annex.6) and order dated 15.5.2015 (Annex.7) issued by the Special Officer, Water Resources and Chief Engineer, Water Resources (North).Hanumangarh and further a prayer has been made that the respondents be restrained from altering and amending the outlets of Chak 1MD to 6Md.Tehsil Anoopgarh, District Sriganganagar. The petitioners in the present writ petitions are agriculturists, most of them allottees of agriculture land from the State Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :ORDER : 1. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8316/2015 Sukhmandar Singh V/s State of Rajasthan & ORS.2. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5885/2015 Raja Ram & ORS.V/s State of Rajasthan & ORS.Date of Order :: 21.9.2015 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.D.S.Rajvi, for the petitioner/s. Mr.S.M.Toshniwal ) for the respondent/s. Mr.B.S.Sandhu ) ----- BY THE COURT: These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking to question orders dated 18.12.2012 (Annex.4).order dated 3.5.2015 (Annex.6) and order dated 15.5.2015 (Annex.7) issued by the Special Officer, Water Resources and Chief Engineer, Water Resources (North).Hanumangarh and further a prayer has been made that the respondents be restrained from altering and amending the outlets of Chak 1MD to 6Md.Tehsil Anoopgarh, District Sriganganagar. The petitioners in the present writ petitions are agriculturists, most of them allottees of agriculture land from the State Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) Dated: - 8th September, 2015. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr.Sanajeev Prakash Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr.Ankur Mathur, Mr.Ankit Sethi and Mr.Rajesh Kala, for the petitioner. Dr.P.S.Bhati,Additional Advocate General with Mr.S.S.Rathore, for the respondents.1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 3.7.15 issued by the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, banning the admission of the students in Jodhpur National University (for short 'the University') during the academic session 2015-16.2. The petitioner-University, a body corporate, has been constituted and established under the provisions of Jodhpur National University, Jodhpur Act, 2009 ( for short the Act. her...
Tag this Judgment!