Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: recent Court: rajasthan Year: 2006 Page 1 of about 17 results (0.030 seconds)

Nov 20 2006 (HC)

Manager, Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-20-2006

Reported in : RLW2007(3)Raj1934

..... to the labouers engaged by m/s. hochtief gammon. in august, 1957, the hindustan steel ltd (in short company) and m/s. hochtief gammon (in short contractor) entered into a contract for execution of the foundation and civil engineering working of the hot and cold rolling mills at rourkela including the purification and other civil engineering work connected with the water ..... supply to the rolling mills. as per the contract, all payments to the labour were to be made by the said company. on demand of the union, reference was made to the labour court on the question whether the ..... to say again that the original mistake arose out of the assumption by the labour commissioner that this was a case of an ordinary contract which would apply to other contractors also. he had apparently not seen the contract between the company and the appellant and that mistake was adopted by the state government and they stuck to it in spite of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2006 (HC)

Board and Boards Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Himalaya Paper (Machinery) Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-20-2006

Reported in : AIR2007Raj1; RLW2006(4)Raj3255

..... is for the plaintiff's use. as stated above, money was paid by the plaintiff as an advance for the due performance of a contract. since the contract failed, therefore the plaintiff claimed return of money paid as security and as such the money received by the defendant was not for plaintiff' ..... amount was paid as an advance against the price settled between the parties. it appears that despite repeated requests, the defendant did not fulfill the contract, inasmuch as the defendant neither allowed inspection of the machineries nor it supplied to the plaintiff and ultimately the plaintiff had no option but to ..... as such babu singh had filed the suit within limitation of three years.10. in the case at hand, the parties had entered into a contract on 17th october, 1974 with certain terms and conditions, according to which the defendant had agreed to supply machineries to the plaintiff within a ..... . june 10,1974 when the civil court declared that the government had no power to grant the lease of the area, subject matter of the contract between the appellants and the respondents. therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, the district judge, guargaon, rightly came to ..... the suit for recovery of money paid upon an existing consideration, which afterwards fails. in the instant case, money was paid in pursuance of a contract which ultimately failed and therefore the date of reckoning the period of limitation is the date of failure of consideration as provided under article 47 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2006 (HC)

State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and anr. Vs. Food Corporation of Indi ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-05-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(4)Raj3225

..... mobilization loan from the contractor under the contract.having referred the above expression, the apex court held as under:. the bank guarantee thus could be invoked only in the circumstances referred to ..... object, but these expressions are immediately qualified by following:.in the event that the obligations expressed in the said clause of the above mentioned contract have not been fulfilled by the contractor giving the right of claim to the employer for recovery of the whole or part of the advance ..... contractor giving the right of claim to the employer for recovery of the whole or part of the advance mobilization loan from the contractor under the contract.12. in para 12 of the judgment, the apex court observed:where the bank, in the above guarantee, no doubt, has used the expression ..... (supra), relied upon by mr. soral, learned counsel for the appellant, the bank guarantee was furnished in terms of clause 9 of the principal contract between the parties. to make a distinction between the two bank guarantees, one in the instant case and another in the above case before the apex ..... bihar and ors. : air1999sc3710 .7. per contra, mr. j.p. goyal appearing for the respondent has vehemently contended that there was clear breach of contract by the rajasthan agro industries, thereby causing loss of more than rs. two lacs to the plaintiff food corporation of india and therefore the defendant bank extending .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2006 (HC)

Arvind Kumar Joshi Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-05-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(4)Raj3149

mohammad rafiq, j.1. this writ petition has been filed by shri arvind kumar joshi who is a blind person. he is presently working as teacher gr. iii in government upper primary school, police line, jodhpur. having accepted the challenge of life in a determined manner, he acquired the qualification of m.a. in first division and b.ed, in good second division. he with deep desire to achieve success in life strived to over come the deficiency inflicted upon him by cruel hands of destiny. having secured the employment as teacher gr. ill he did not remain content and still yearned for progress in life.2. in response to the advertisement no. 2/2001-2002 issued by the rajasthan public service commission (for short 'the r.p.s.c') the petitioner applied for appointment on the post of school lecturer (hindi). the r.p.s.c. advertised 339 posts of school lecturers (hindi). the petitioner was the only candidate who applied in response to the said advertisement against the posts of school lecturers (hindi) claiming reservation under the category of blinds. the r.p.s.c. issued to him admission card for appearing in the screening test conducted on 12th may, 2002. a copy of the admission card placed on record as annexure 2 reveals that the category of the petitioner was mentioned as 'bl', which is the short form of 'blind'. when the result of the screening test was declared on 12.9.2001, the petitioner was shocked to find that he has been declared fail.3. since there was reservation of 3% for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 2006 (HC)

Bakemans Ind. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-10-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(4)Raj3104

..... .14. from a bare perusal of the aforesaid judgment, it is clear that in that case, the hon'ble supreme court quashed the proceedings on the grounds that breach of contract would amount to cheating only if the intention to cheat was existing at the very inception. if such intention is developed later on, the same would not amount to cheating ..... subsequently, a culpable intention right at the beginning, that is, when he made the promises cannot be presumed. a distinction has to be kept in mind between mere breach of contract and the offence of cheating. it depends upon the intention of the accused at the time of inducement. the subsequent conduct is not the sole test. mere breach of ..... contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent, dishonest intention is shown at the beginning of the transaction. the substance of the complaint is to be seen. mere ..... moving the consumer forum in relation to the claim of rs. 4,20,000. it is well settled that every breach of contract would not give rise to an offence of cheating and only in those cases breach of contract would amount to cheating where there was any deception played at the very inception. if the intention to cheat has developed later .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 22 2006 (HC)

Bhagwati Enterprises Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation an ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-22-2006

Reported in : AIR2006Raj233

..... submit bank guarantee and the samples. thereafter pseb appointed arbitrator before whom claim of rs. 48,61,458/- for the alleged breach of contract was made. considering the above facts their lordships of the supreme court held the offer made by iml was subject to their own terms ..... . ltd. air 1934 all 298 it was held that where by the absolute and unequivocal acceptance of an offer a binding contract has come into existence between the parties, the non-execution of a formal document cannot absolve the parties of their engagement.15. in india meters ltd ..... air1951all93 wherein it was observed that theory of offer and acceptance has received statutory recognition in india so that every transaction to be recognised as a contract, must, in its ultimate analysis, resolve itself into a proposal and its absolute and unqualified acceptance.14. in muhammad sultan v. clive insurance co ..... to will in fact go through, the non-execution of such a document will not affect the finality and the binding character of the contract already concluded between them.13. full bench of allahabad high court had occasion to consider the concept of offer and acceptance in deep chandra ..... applicant.4. in preliminary objections raised on behalf of rsrtc it is contended that the application seeking appointment of arbitrator is not maintainable because contract between the applicant-firm and rsrtc has not yet been concluded and no dispute can be alleged by the applicant in regard to the agreement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 2006 (HC)

Tija Devi Vs. Girdhari Singh and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-18-2006

Reported in : 2007ACJ1998

dinesh maheshwari, j.1. the petitioner, claimant in m.a.c. case no. 104 of 1999 before the motor accidents claims tribunal, ratangarh, has submitted this writ petition against the order passed by the tribunal on 1.6.2005 closing her right to lead evidence.2. it appears from the order-sheets placed on record that the claim application was originally submitted by one lichhma, daughter-in-law of the petitioner, claiming compensation on account of death of her husband bhanwarlal (son of the petitioner) in a vehicular accident. it further appears that the said claimant lichhma, also expired issueless on 16.1.2003. the petitioner has thereafter been transposed as claimant by the order dated 25.2.2004.3. the tribunal found on 1.6.2005 that the case was pending since the year 1999 and issues were framed on 29.5.2002 and despite extending several opportunities and despite granting last chance on 16.2.2005, the claimant still failed to adduce evidence and, therefore, evidence was required to be closed.4. assailing the order dated 1.6.2005, the learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously contended that a look at the order-sheets of the case makes it apparent that on substantial number of occasions, the matter has been adjourned for no fault of the petitioner, that even after granting of the last opportunity on 16.2.2005, next two dates were adjourned for the lawyers not attending to work and in the overall circumstances of the case, the tribunal was not justified in closing the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 2006 (HC)

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mohan Kanwar and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-28-2006

Reported in : 2007ACJ420

..... (supra).31. the only contention raised before the hon'ble supreme court was that claim for compensation made by the appellant under the workmen's compensation act was dehors the contract of service and was based on law of torts and, therefore, the bar created by section 53 of the e.s.i. act was not applicable. after examining the scheme .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 2006 (HC)

Aerens Goldsouk International Ltd. Co. Vs. Samit Kavadia and 5 ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-05-2006

Reported in : 2008(2)ARBLR545(Raj); RLW2007(4)Raj3283

..... the supreme court in durga prasad v. deep chand : [1954]1scr360 held thus-the proper form of decree is to direct specific performance of the contract between the vendor and the plaintiff and direct the subsequent transferee to join in the conveyance so as to pass on the title which resides in him to ..... the respondents no. 1,2,4 and 5 in their joint reply stated that the petitioner company was not ready and willing to perform its part of the contract and since breach was committed by the petitioner thus the present petition is not maintainable.15. constitution bench of the apex court in s.b.p. & co ..... the land to be transferred to the petitioner. any attempt made in that directions shall lead to the cause of action to the petitioner for enforcing the contract. it was pointed out that the act of the respondents if converted in to action would amount to fraud and cheating.7. thereafter the respondents 1 ..... of 6.52 hectares in the name of the respondent no. 3 that shows the dishonest intention of respondent no. 1 to wriggle out of the contract. no efforts were made by the respondents 1 and 2 to obtain the sanction of the land relating to 81 hectares of khewat containing the names of ..... . 60,00,000/- (sixty lacs) was enclosed with the letter. contention of the petitioner company is that the respondents 1 and 2 had committed breach of contract. the petitioner company replied the said letter informing respondents 1 and 2 the details of mou and agreement to sell.3. on april 23, 2005, the government .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 14 2006 (HC)

Dalveer Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-14-2006

Reported in : RLW2007(2)Raj1083

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. dalveer singh, vijay singh and arjun, the appellants herein, along with mukesh were put to trial before learned additional sessions judge (fast track) no. 1 bharatpur, who vide judgment dated june 5, 2002 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:dalveer singh, vijay singh and arjun:under section 302 ipc:each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. under section 394 ipc:each to suffer imprisonment for seven years and fine of rs. 500a, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month.the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. it is the prosecution case that informant lal singh (pw.1) on august 3, 1999 submitted a written report at police station udhyog nagar, bharatpur stating therein that on july 30,1999 his driver mohkam singh proceeded to mathura mandi on tractor no. rj- 5/r6404 around 3 pm for selling 62 bags of mustard and 9 bags of grain. when lal singh reached mathura mandi in the morning of july 31,1999 he came to know that mohakam did not reach there. lal singh then went to the village of mohakam but mohakam did not reach his village too. since mohakam appeared to have misappropriated tractor trolly and crops, action be initiated against him. on that report a case under section 406 ipc was registered and investigation commenced. during investigation it was revealed by satish and mahaveer that in the tractor of mohakam 5-6 .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //