Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 2005 Page 4 of about 69 results (0.019 seconds)

Mar 22 2005 (HC)

Anand Singh Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-22-2005

Reported in : RLW2005(3)Raj1998; 2004WLC(Raj)UC510

satya prakash pathak, j.1. this appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 5th may, 2001 passed by learned district & sessions judge, jodhpur in sessions case no. 65/1998-state v. anand singh whereby the accused appellant has been convicted under section 302 and sentenced to imprisonment for life and pay a fine of rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. the period of accused- appellant's remaining in police and judicial custody during investigation & trial of the case is made adjustable in the main sentence under the provisions of section 428 ipc.2. the present appeal arises in the following circumstances: 1. pw7 mukesh submitted a written report ex.p/12 at police station, pratap nagar, jodhpur on 26.03.1998 at 10:10 in the morning, inter-alia stating that at about 9:30 in the morning when he was at his house, bajrang singh-a domestic servant (since deceased, hereinafter to be referred to as 'the deceased'), was doing some work in the bara (a shelter place of cows and bufallows). at that time, accused anand singh came to the house of the informant pw7 and from the outside of the house he called the deceased. on his call, deceased bajrang singh went out and as he reached on the road, in front of his house, the accused started beating and inflicting knife blows on the person of the deceased. he alongwith his elder brother went there hearing the hue and cries and tried to get bajrang singh out of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 2005 (HC)

Anda Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-06-2005

Reported in : 2005CriLJ3522

satya prakash pathak, j.1. this appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 29th june 2000 passed by learned district & sessions judge, jodhpur in sessions case no. 44/1998, by which the appellants have been convicted under section 302 read with section 34, ipc and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.2. briefly stated, the facts are that poona ram (p.w. 1) submitted a written report ex. p/1 on 18-2-1998 at 9.30 p.m. in the police station, khedapa with the averments that on 16-2-1998 in village mornavada a scuffle took place between mala ram and bagha ram, in which bagha ram sustained more injuries on his person but no report was lodged of the incident on that day in the police station. it is further averred in the report that on the previous night mala ram had gone to the residence of uda ram and told him that anda ram had gone to the dhani of dhanna ram and both of them along with kumbha ram will go to the police station, therefore, he should go there to get the matter settled by compromise between them. in the morning of 18-2-1998, he (poona ram) along with uda ram (since deceased, hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') proceeded on foot towards the dhani of kumbha ram which was near village dhannari and at about 9.30 a.m. they reached at the tubewell of kumbha ram. mota ram, who is the son of kumbha ram, met them there and informed them about .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 2005 (HC)

Suresh Kumar @ Sushil Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-20-2005

Reported in : 2005CriLJ116; I(2006)DMC130; RLW2005(4)Raj2618

f.c. bansal, j.1. the appeal no. 1691/2003 has been filed by accused-appellant suresh kumar @ sushil yadav against the judgment and order dated 22.11.2003 passed by the learned additional sessions judge fast track no. 2, jaipur city, jaipur whereby while acquitting the accused-appellant of the charge under section 304b ipc, convicted him under sections 498a and 306 ipc and sentenced to suffer r.i. for two years and a fine of rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo s.i. for one month and r.i. for five years and a fine of rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo s.i. for two months respectively. both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. against the same judgment by which accused suresh has been acquitted from the charge under section 304b ipc, complainant ram lal yadav has filed a criminal revision petition no. 1389/2003. both the appeal and the revision petition have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 1.11.2000, ramlal yadav s/o shri narayan yadav, r/o village kishorepura, submitted a written report at p.s. vaishali nagar, jaipur wherein it was, interalia, stated that his younger sister raju was married to suresh yadav s/o shri sohan lal yadav, r/o heerapura, ajmer road, jaipur during her childhood and she had been residing at her father's house since her marriage. her 'gona' the ceremony of taking bride to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 17 2005 (HC)

Viswanath Sharma (Shri) Vs. State of Rajasthan and 3 ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-17-2005

Reported in : RLW2006(1)Raj350

s.k. keshote, j.1. the learned single judge, under its order, dated 9.8.2000, on having found conflict in two division bench decisions of the court in g.n. tandon v. state of rajasthan and ors. 1996(1) rlr 538 and dr. kailash chandra mittal and 5 ors. v. state of rajasthan 2000 wlc (raj.) uc 343, referred the matter to the larger bench and the question framed for consideration thereof is whether ordinance 67-a of the rajasthan university ordinances (for short, 'the ordinances'), will prevail or the employees will be governed by the rajasthan non-government educational institution act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act, 1989') and the rajasthan grant-in-aid to education and cultural institutions rules, 1963 (for short, 'the rules, 1963'). though it is not specifically stated in the question but from the facts of the case, which have come on the record, we find that the dispute relates to the age of superannuation of the teachers in the non-government recognised affiliated aided colleges in the state of rajasthan.2. for adjudication of the question referred to hereinabove the facts necessary for the decision of the case to be noticed briefly are recorded as follows:3. respondent no. 2, seth juthalal education society, jhunjhunu (hereinafter referred to as 'the society') is a society registered under the societies registration act, 1958. seth motilal p.g. college, jhunjhunu (for short, 'the college') is an educational institution established and controlled by the society .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 2005 (HC)

Surendra Bhatia Vs. Poonam Bhatia and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-22-2005

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 immovable properties thus being ancestral, she had a share in the same. the two broad defences projected by surendra bhatia and his sister, not only fizzled out before the learned single judge but the same also cut no ice in the appeals preferred by them as the same came to be dismissed by the learned single judge vide orders dated 26.4.2001. it is against these two orders dated 6.12.1999 and 26.4.2001 that the present appeal under section 18 of the rajasthan high court ordinance, 1949 has been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 02 2005 (HC)

Ganesh Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-02-2005

Reported in : RLW2005(2)Raj831; 2005(2)WLC259

narendra kumar jain, j.1. the petitioner has filed this second bail application under section 438 cr.p.c. before this court on 7.2.2005 after dismissal of his first bail application under section 438 cr.p.c. on 1.2.2005.2. one shri harpreet singh, an official of municipal board, hanumangarh town, lodged a fir on 18th september, 2004 at police station, vishwakarma, jaipur wherein it was alleged that on 17th september, 2004 he alongwith mr. madan singh budhaniya, executive officer, municipal board, hanumangarh was travelling in the bus of sharma travels from hanumangarh to jaipur alongwith two bags of record containing 41 files in one bag and six files in another bag. during the journey, one sumit, member of municipal board also came in the said bus at bus stand, pallu. when they reached jaipur, then he saw that both the bags were missing. during investigation, some evidence came on record that sumit took some files from the bus and gave to the petitioner, who was travelling in car.3. being apprehended with the arrest, the petitioner moved a bail application under section 438 cr.p.c. before the sessions judge, jaipur city and the same was dismissed vide order dated 23.11.2004. thereafter, the petitioner moved s.b. criminal misc. bail application no. 5795/2004 under section 438 cr.p.c. before this court. the case diary was summoned in the matter and the argument were heard. the involvement of the petitioner was found in the inc dent and because of the fact that recovery of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2005 (HC)

Emarata Ram Pooniya Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-15-2005

Reported in : RLW2005(3)Raj1755; 2005(2)WLC358

n.n. mathur, j.1. the appellants by way of separate writ petitions challenged the process of selection on the post of teachers gr.ii/senior teachers, pursuant to the zone-wise advertisements viz; jaipur, jodhpur, kota, udaipur, ajmer & churu. the respondents after due consideration of merit in accordance with the prescribed procedure, issued provisional merit list of 5712 candidates on 19th september 2003. on coming to know of the result, out of thousands of unsuccessful candidates, few of them in total 9 writ petitions under article 226 came to be filed in october 2003, challenging the process of selection, on diverse grounds. the learned single judge dismissed all the writ petitions by impugned judgment dated 4.11.2004 mainly on the ground that no interference is warranted with the selections made on the basis of practice in vogue for long time, more particularly at the instance of the candidates, who have taken a chance and participated in the selection process. learned single judge partly allowed the writ petition being s.b. civil writ petition no. 5709/2003 'dharamveer v. state' and directed the respondent-state to exclude candidates from consideration possessing the degree from such of the institutions, which are situated in the state of j & k, as they are not recognized by the national council for teacher education (in short, 'the ncte'). learned single judge also held that the knowledge of rajasthani language and culture is an essential part and, as such, directed the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 16 2005 (HC)

Bal Kishan Garg Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-16-2005

Reported in : RLW2005(3)Raj2047; 2005(2)WLC392

r.p. vyas, j.1. by the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed that the order dated 13.3.90 (annexure 7), passed by the rajasthan civil services appellate tribunal, rajasthan, jaipur, as well as the notice dated 9.4.85 (annexure 4), issued by the collector, chittorgarh be declared invalid and be quashed, with all consequential benefits.2. the facts giving rise to the instant petition are that shri bal kishan garg-petitioner was appointed as patwari vide order dated 25.12.1954. for the first time, vide order dated 10.10.75, the petitioner was given compulsory retirement under rule 244 (2) of the rajasthan service rules, 1951 (for short, 'the rules, 1951'). thereafter, the aforesaid order of compulsory retirement was revoked by a subsequent order dated 4.5.77 and the petitioner was taken back in service.3. for the second time, the petitioner was given compulsory retirement vide order dated 7.4.81, which was challenged by way of appeal before the rajasthan civil services appellate tribunal, jaipur. the appeal of the petitioner was accepted by the tribunal vide order 28.4.83 and the order of compulsory retirement dated 7.4.81 was quashed and set aside.4. for the third time, the petitioner was given a notice dated 9.4.85 (annexure 4) by the collector, chittorgarh, informing him that the compulsory retirement is being given to him on the expiry of three months' period from the date of service of the notice.5. against the aforesaid notice, the petitioner preferred an appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2005 (HC)

Dhirendra Manharbhai (Shri) and anr. Vs. State and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-06-2005

Reported in : RLW2005(4)Raj2700; 2005(3)WLC80

n.n. mathur, j.1. the petitioners in the instant public interest litigation claims to be the followers of pushtimargiya vaishnava sampradaya and devotees of temple of shri shrinath ji at nathdvvara. they seek direction to the respondents for framing of proper and appropriate scheme for regulating arrangement of the darshan, holding of festivals, ceremonies and distribution of prasad. a further direction has been sought commanding the 2nd respondent i.e. goswami shri rakesh ji maharaj to ensure the performance of public and statutory duties.2. before dealing with the merit of the grievance voiced, it would be convenient to set out briefly the historical, cultural and religious background of the temple and the incidence in relation to the management of the temple.3. the temple of shrinathji at nathdwara holds a very high place among the hindu temples in this country and is looked upon with great reverence by the hindus in general and vaishnava followers of vallabha in particular. as in the case of other ancient revered hindu temples, so in the case of the shrinathji temple at nathdwara, mythology has woven an attractive web about the genesis of its construction at nathdwara. part of it may be history and part may be fiction, but the story is handed down from generation to generation of devotees and is believed by all of them to be true. this famous temple is visited by thousands of hindu devotees in general and by the followers of the pushtimargiya vaishnava sampradaya in .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 04 2005 (HC)

Bhorya and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-04-2005

Reported in : RLW2005(3)Raj2147; 2005(3)WLC262

v.k. bali, j.1. this appeal has been filed by bhorya and his four sons namely harkesh, ghisya, ramji lal and moti recorded against them, by the additional sessions judge, dausa. whereas ghisya has been found guilty under section x ipc substantively and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, others named above have been held guilty for the offence under section 302 with the aid of section 149 ipc and convicted likewise. they have been also ordered to pay a fine of rs. 2,000/-, on in default of the same, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of there months. they have also been convicted under various other sections of the ipc, as detailed below.bhoryaunder section 148 ipc - 3 months' rigorous imprisonment.under section 452 ipc - 6 months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of rs. 200/- and default in payment of fine to undergo 15 days simple imprisonment.under section 325/149 ipc - one year ri and a fine of rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 15 days s.i.under section 324 ipc - 6 months' simple imprisonment with a fine of rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine si for 15 days.under section 323 ipc - three months' r.i.harkesh and ramjilalunder section 147 ipc - 3 months' r.i.under section 452 ipc - 6 months' ri and a fine of rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine, si for 15 days.under section 325/149 ipc - one year r.i. and a fine of rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine, 15 days' si.under section 324/149 ipc - 6 .....

Tag this Judgment!

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