Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Page 9 of about 2,907 results (0.013 seconds)

Jul 26 1991 (HC)

Gyan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1991(2)WLN454

milap chandra jain, j.1. this writ petition has been filed against the order (annexure5) of the deputy secretary, revenue (gr. 1) department, government of rajasthan, jaipur dated january 28, 1981 by which 1/5th of the pension payable to the petitioner has been with held under rule 170, rajasthan service rules. the facts of the case giving rise to this writ petition may be summarised thus.2. in the year 1974, the petitioner was tehsildar cum sub registrar, revdar (sirohi). 55 bighas 7 biswas of agricultural land situated in village harni amrapura tehsil revdar (sirohi) was sold by the khatedars devisingh, bhanwar singh and lal chand for rs. 20,000/-to pabudan singh, prabhu singh and bhagwan singh, sons of the petitioner, and three sale-deeds were presented before him for registration and they were duly registered. mutation of the said agricultural land was duly effected in their favour. on october 10, 1975, charge-sheet under rule 16, rajasthan civil services (classification, control and appeal) rules, 1958 was served upon him. the collector, sirohi was appointed as enquirying officer. after taking his reply, examining the nine witnesses of the department and hearing the presenting officer and the petitioner, the collector, sirohi gave his report on april 30, 1978 holding that all charges except one are proved. meanwhile, the petitioner retired on february 28, 1978. thereatfer, show cause notice annexure 1 was issued on october 31, 1979 by the deputy secretary revenue (gr. 1) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 2015 (HC)

Ram Singh and Ors Vs. Bhikam Chand and Ors

Court : Rajasthan - Jodhpur

sbc first appeal no.469/2009 ram singh & ors. vs. bhikam chand & ors. judgment dt:28. 1/2015 1/35 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur judgment ram singh & ors. vs. bhikam chand & ors. s.b.civil first appeal no.469/2009 date of judgment :28. h january, 2015 present hon'ble dr. justice vineet kothari mr.jitendra chopra, for the appellant-defendants mr. suresh shrimali, ]. mr.sundeep bhandawat,]. for the respondent-plaintiffs. mr.ashok patel, ]. by the court: reportable1 the defendants ram singh s/o ghasi ram & ors have filed the present first appeal under section 96 cpc against bhikam chand s/o ram jeevan & anr. being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 12/8/2009 passed learned addl. district judge (fast track) no.3, jodhpur in a suit for specific performance being civil suit no.603/2004 (351/2004) bhikam chand & arun kumar vs. ram singh s/o ghasi ram & ors.2. the said suit for specific performance was filed by the plaintiffs bhikam chand & ors. on 2/11/2004 in respect of agriculture land belonging to ghasi ram, father of the present appellant-defendant ram singh, ad-measuring 28 bighas 19 biswas situated of khasra no.821, 822, 823, 824, 827 & 827/1 in village baga, tehsil & district sbc first appeal no.469/2009 ram singh & ors. vs. bhikam chand & ors. judgment dt:28. 1/2015 2/35 jodhpur, which was agreed to be sold to the plaintiffs under the agreement to sell dated 28/10/1989 at the rate of rs.51,000/- per bigha and this agreement dated 28/10/1989 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 1991 (HC)

Derby Textiles Ltd. Vs. Mahamantri, Derby Textiles Karmachari and Shra ...

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (1994)IIILLJ528Raj; 1991(1)WLN256; 1991(2)WLN99

..... , the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the standing orders are framed on the basis of a tripartite contract, in which the state govt. also acts as a mediator between the employer and the employees or their unions and the certifying officer also the appellate authority are duty bound to see that standing orders are certified only when they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2000 (HC)

Chiman Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR2000Raj206; 2000(2)WLC1

b.j. shethna, j.1. this petition has been placed before us on a reference made by our learned brother hon'ble v.g. palshikar, j. on 14-5-1999. it is a brief order, which we would like to reproduce, which is as under :--'dated 14-5-1999.s. b. writ petition no. 1688/83hon'ble shri v. g. palshikar. j.mr. d.s. shishodia for the appellant, mr. vijay vishnoi, for the respondent.in this petition, the order of the collector and other authorities is challenged on several grounds. the important question, however, which arise in this case is regarding jurisdiction of the collector to invoke revisional powers under section 27a of the rajasthan panchayat act. 1953 and the rules made thereunder can be exercised at any time as the section provides no limitation for such exercise. there are divergent view on the point and at least two contradictory judgments of the single bench including myself. i am of the view that though there is no period of limitation prescribed the reasonable period as contemplated by the residuary article of the indian limitation act would apply, conversely no limitation can apply is also a view taken by another single bench. even division bench relyingon the point may need harmonise construction for interpretation. in such circumstances i feel that authoritative pronouncement by this hon'ble court on this question of law is necessary as the question is repeated with regular intervals.therefore, place the papers before your lordship the chief justice for appropriate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 1982 (HC)

Mathuralal and anr. Vs. Mandattsingh and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1982WLN(UC)173

..... , appropriate action was not taken at the appropriate time, the provisions of the election law which have got to be construed strictly, must work with indifference to consequences, immediate or mediate. on the part of the officers also, it will vitalise & invigorate a healthy democratic practice if, charged with the electoral duties, demanding high probity, they neither exhibit rank remissions nor .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 2000 (HC)

Smt. Jaya Ben and ors. Vs. Gaffar Khan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2000(3)WLN200

sunil kumar garg, j.1. all these five special appeals are being decided by a common judgment as they all arise out of same accident that took place on 8.4.1972 and in all these special appeals, common questions of law and facts are involved.2. all these five special appeals under section 18 of the rajasthan high court ordinance, 1949 have been filed by the appellants-petitioners against the judgment dated 9.7.1985 passed by the learned single judge of this court by which the learned single judge while dismissing the five appeals filed by gaffar khan (respondent-1), reduced the quantum of compensation awarded by the motor accident claims tribunal, jodhpur in each case and also dismissed the cross objections filed by the present appellants-petitioners and also held both insurance companies not liable.3. brief facts giving rise to these special appeals are as follows-on 8.4.1972, smt. jaya ben, appellant in d.b. civil special appeal no. 28/1985 alongwith others, namely, kirti ben, appellant in d.b. civil special appeal no. 32/85, smt. rama laxmi appellant in d.b. civil special appeal no. 33/1985i lalita ben, appellant in d.b. civil special appeal no. 31/1985 and smt. bhanumati, appellant in d.b. civil special appeal no. 30/85 hired a taxi bearing no. rjt 1058 at falna station for going to ranakpur. the owner of the said taxi was gaffar khan (respondent no. 1) and its driver was deva ram (respondent no. 4) and the said taxi was insured with the united fire and general insurance .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 2001 (HC)

Ram Pyari and ors. Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2002(5)WLC194; 2002(5)WLN217

bhagwati prasad, j.1. in this writ petition, the petitioners has raised questions regarding the validity of initiation of proceedings under rajasthan imposition of ceiling on agricultural holdings act, 1973 (for short the act of 1973'), rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 chapter iii-b (old ceiling law) (for short 'the act of 1955') and the rajasthan imposition of ceiling on agricultural holdings rules, 1963 (for short 'the rules of 1963').2. according to the petitioners, proceedings against shri sanwar lal mansinghka and his wife smt. ram pyari one of the petitioners alongwith legal representatives of sanwarmal were initiated in ceiling case no. 19/1973. these proceedings were decided by the then authorised officer by the judgment dt. 2.12.1975. it was held by the authorised officer that sanwarmal was holding following lands :-______________________________________________________________s. name of village measurement_______________________________________no. bighas acres standard acres______________________________________________________________1. arajiya 61.12 33 9.522. kotiya 63.03 39 22.503. lambiya kalan 95.03 56 16.05__________________________________________total 219.18 128 48.17__________________________________________________________________3. according to the petitioners, in those proceedings, the tehsildar reported that there is separate possession of various persons on various parcels of land. after calculation, it was held that late shri sanwarmal was entitled to hold .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 2015 (HC)

Ram Kumar Vs. State and Ors

Court : Rajasthan - Jodhpur

1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur1 d.b.civil special appeal no.375/2002 ram kumar v/s state of rajasthan & ors.2. d.b.civil special appeal no.35/2002 ram kumar v/s het ram date of judgment::- 18th.8.2015 present hon ble chief justice mr.sunil ambwani hon ble mr.justice ajit singh mr.j.l.purohit, senior advocate ) with mr.rajeev purohit )-for the appellant. mr.s.l.jain ) mr.k.l.bishnoi )-for the respondents. judgment (reportable) by the court (per hon'ble sunil ambwani, chief justice) special appeal no.375/2002 1. this special appeal is directed against the judgment of learned single judge dated 20.5.2002, by which he partly allowed the writ petition with direction that shri het ram will execute the sale deed in pursuance of the agreement of sale dated 3.4.1984 to the extent of his transferable share of 2.4 bighas. it was found that the land was agreed to be purchased at the rate of rs.11,000/- per bigha, for which rs.80,000/- was paid and thus, shri het ram will refund the excess amount to the appellant-ram kumar. shri het ram was directed to execute the sale deed to the extent of his share and not of any specific part of the land. after the sale 2 deed is executed and registered, the appellant-ram kumar may file a suit for division of the holding under section 53 of the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 to get the land partitioned.2. brief facts giving rise to this special appeal, which was held to be maintainable vide order dated 5.5.2015 as it was filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 2015 (HC)

Ram Kumar Vs. Het Ram

Court : Rajasthan - Jodhpur

1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur1 d.b.civil special appeal no.375/2002 ram kumar v/s state of rajasthan & ors.2. d.b.civil special appeal no.35/2002 ram kumar v/s het ram date of judgment::- 18th.8.2015 present hon ble chief justice mr.sunil ambwani hon ble mr.justice ajit singh mr.j.l.purohit, senior advocate ) with mr.rajeev purohit )-for the appellant. mr.s.l.jain ) mr.k.l.bishnoi )-for the respondents. judgment (reportable) by the court (per hon'ble sunil ambwani, chief justice) special appeal no.375/2002 1. this special appeal is directed against the judgment of learned single judge dated 20.5.2002, by which he partly allowed the writ petition with direction that shri het ram will execute the sale deed in pursuance of the agreement of sale dated 3.4.1984 to the extent of his transferable share of 2.4 bighas. it was found that the land was agreed to be purchased at the rate of rs.11,000/- per bigha, for which rs.80,000/- was paid and thus, shri het ram will refund the excess amount to the appellant-ram kumar. shri het ram was directed to execute the sale deed to the extent of his share and not of any specific part of the land. after the sale 2 deed is executed and registered, the appellant-ram kumar may file a suit for division of the holding under section 53 of the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 to get the land partitioned.2. brief facts giving rise to this special appeal, which was held to be maintainable vide order dated 5.5.2015 as it was filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1998 (HC)

Sukhpal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1998Raj103; 1998(1)WLN118

orderb.s. chauhan, j. 1. the instant writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 29-11-1992 contained in annexure-3 to this writ petition, which has been passed by the board of revenue (respondent no. 2) rejecting the revision filed by the petitioner against the order of therevenue authority dated 31-1-1992 containedin annexure-p.2 to the petition passed on hisapplication under order 7, rule 11 of the code of civilprocedure in the suit pending before the saidauthority. 2. the brief facts of the case, as revealed by the record, are that the petitioner-defendant arid respondent no. 3-plaintiff are real brothers and respondent no. 4 smt. gurdev kaur is their sister, their father ishar singh was holding a (sic) land in chak no. 5-mld (b), tehsil (sic) district sri ganganagar, who died on 12-11-1987. the petitioner-defendant got the mutation of the whole land in his favour on the strength of a will purported to have been executed by his father ishar singh. the respondent no. 3 (plaintiff) filed a suit before the revenue authority under section 53 read with section 88 of the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the tenancy act'), wherein the allegations have been made as under :--(i) after the death of their father, their sister gurdeo kaur has relinquished her share in favour of the said brothers;(ii) partition took place between the petitioner-defendant and respondent no. 3 (plaintiff) which was verified and signed by the tehsildar and it .....

Tag this Judgment!


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