Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 2006 Page 6 of about 88 results (0.010 seconds)

Jan 05 2006 (HC)

State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Jangir Kaur

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-05-2006

Reported in : AIR2006Raj195

satya prakash pathak, j.1. this is an appeal under section 100, c.p.c. by the defendants against judgments and decrees passed consecutively by two courts below. the learned court of munsif vide its judgment and decree dated 8-1-1988 in civil suit no. 14/1987 has directed the defendants to supply 4 times water to the garden of plaintiff-respondent at sri karanpur for irrigation and the learned first appellate court has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the learned munsif, sri karanpur vide its judgment and decree dated 20-11 -1991 in civil appeal no. 2/1988 - state and ors. v. jangir kaur.2. brief facts of the case are that a suit was filed in the court of munsif and judicial magistrate, first class, sri karanpur by jangir kaur, the widow of late dayal singh, stating therein that in killa nos. 1 to 5 of murabba no. 24, chak no. 20-f there lies land of her husband who was expired, which has been entered in her name. it was further stated that the defendants nos. 1 and 2 issued instructions for supplying 4 times water to the persons maintaining gardens in their lands and also assured verbally about it, so acting on their assurances the plaintiff invested a huge amount and putting hard labour started gardening in the land but water as assured was not supplied rather the same was discontinued.3. before the court of munsif, from the side of defendants, the sdo j. s. saluja presented himself in the court but no reply was filed on their behalf and ultimately the matter was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 16 2006 (HC)

Dayal Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan (the)

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-16-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(2)Raj954; 2006(2)WLC235

vineet kothari, j.1. these two appeals are directed against the judgment of additional sessions judge no. 2, sikar dated 7.12.2001 whereby appellants hari ram and dayal ram were convicted for the offence under section 302 r/w section 34 ipc and were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of rs. 10000/- each; and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months each.2. the unfortunate incident occurred on 25.1.2000 at about 6.15 p.m. where as per fir lodged with police station raghunathgarh on 26.1.2000 by bodu ram to the effect that his younger brother pyare lal who came in bus towards sikar side, his dead body was found in an agricultural field in jodla johda and when he went to the said agricultural field, he found the dead body of his younger brother pyare lal and there were several injuries on the body and around the neck was a tie of cloth and some unknown person has killed his brother and had thrown the dead body there. the police investigated in the matter and the prosecution before the learned trial court produced 16 prosecution witnesses and 38 prosecution documents and the defence side produced 7 defence witnesses and 2 defence documents. the learned sessions judge after holding the aforesaid trial, convicted the aforesaid two appellants and one of these appellants, hari ram is in jail and sentence of dayal ram was suspended on 15.9.2005.3. according to pw1 madan lal s/o shri nathu singh/nathu ram on 25.1.2000 when he came .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 2006 (HC)

Manohar Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan Through Pp

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-06-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj2153

narendra kumar jain, j.1. the sessions judge, ajmer, vide its judgment dated 7.1.2002 in sessions case no. 23/2000, convicted and sentenced accused appellant manohar singh son of shri bhairon singh, under section 8/18 of the n.d.p.s. act, 1985 (for short, 'the act') to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rs. 1,00,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment. being aggrieve with the same, the accused appellant has preferred this appeal before this court.2. briefly stated the facts relevant for disposal of this, appeal are that on 16.5.2000 kesar singh (pw. 7), the s.h.o., police station civil lines, ajmer, lodged first information report at police station civil lines, ajmer, district ajmer, wherein it was alleged that on that date at about 8.30 pm he was on petrolling duty at ambedkar circle near bus stand. one informer informed him that one person wearing trouser of green colour and shirt of cream colour, aged about 22-23 years, is standing at the bus stand with one bag wherein smell of opium is coming. he recorded the said information (exhibit p. 11) and sent a copy of the same to the superintendent of police, district ajmer. thereafter he called surendra singh, s.i., and ramendra singh, s.i., through wireless and reached at the bus stand. he saw one person standing at the bus stand as per the information given by the informant and on asking he disclosed his name as manohar singh. thereafter a notice under section 50 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2006 (HC)

Pratap Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-26-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(4)Raj2720; 2006(3)WLC701

prem shanker asopa, j.1. the instant criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant against the judgment dated 29.9.2000 passed by the additional sessions judge, kishangarh, ajmer whereby he has been convicted under section 302 ipc and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer six months' rigorous imprisonment.2. on the basis of the 'parcha-bayan' ex. p2 given by smt. dharmi w/o pratap, a criminal case was registered against the accused-appellant pratap initially for the offence under section 307 ipc on 8.9.99, which was subsequently converted into section 302 ipc after the death of smt. dharmi on the same day i.e. the case of the prosecution as per the aforesaid 'parcha bayan' ex. p. 2, which was later on converted into dying declaration after the death of smt. dharmi and subsequent evidence on record, is that on 8.9.99 pw.8 jeewanram, asi, p.s. madan-ganj received a telephonic information that a woman suffered severe burn injuries at maliyon-ki-dhani, chamragarh, madanganj and on receipt of the said information, pw.8 jeewanram, asi went on the place of occurrence and got the injured woman admitted in y.n. hospital, kishangarh.4. the further case of the prosecution, solely based on the dying declaration and the statement of pw. 8 jeewanram, asi, is that on 8.9.99 when smt. dharmi was cooking food and further cooked meat, her husband pratap came drunk and asked her that she .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2006 (HC)

Vishnu Dutt Sharma Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-13-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(4)Raj3248

chatra ram jat, j.1. in the instant appeals challenge is made to the judgment dated november 28th, 2001 of additional district and sessions judge no. 1 (fast track), jaipur city, jaipur, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:under section. 302 undergo imprisonment for life and fine of rs. 100/-, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year.under section. 201 undergo imprisonment for three years and fine of rs. 100/-, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months.2. it is the prosecution case that radha mohan sharma (pw-2), father of the deceased anuradha had lodged a report (ex. 4) in the police station mansarovar, jaipur on 12.11.1997 with the allegations that on the said day around 4.30 am darshan who happened to be a friend of the complainant informed him about receiving a telephonic call giving information that his daughter was not well and that he was asked to come up. he then told his son himanshu to proceed, but immediately thereafter nimawat came to his house and took him alongwith his son, wife to the house of his son-in-law vishnu dutta (appellant herein). on reaching the house of the appellant, the complainant saw the dead body of his daughter lying on the floor and his son-in-law (the accused) standing nearby the dead body. on being enquired about the death of anuradha, the appellant expressed ignorance and told that he himself had to look into it as to what had happened. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 2006 (HC)

Badru Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-05-2006

Reported in : RLW2006(4)Raj3110; 2006(4)WLC734

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. 'there are no bad soldiers, only bad officers' - this conviction guided napoleon in all his military campaigns. the efficiency of the undertaking civil military or commercial is to a very great extent affected by the moral of its members. an efficient police service, therefore, postulates the maintenance of goods moral in its members. shiv pal singh, a police officer, did not attain goods moral and his dead body was found lying in a pool of blood in the house of appellant badru ram, who along with other nine accused, was put to trial, before the learned additional sessions judge (fast track) no. 2 jhunjhunu. learned judge vide judgment dated september 2, 2005 convicted and sentenced eight appellants as under:appellants badru ram, sheesh ram, mahesh, sita ram, smt. nandi, smt. nanchi, smt. lalita and smt. jamna:under section 148 ipc:each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years fine of rs. 50/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.under section 353/149 ipc:each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of rs. 50/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.under section 332/149 ipc:each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of rs. 50/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.under section 302/149 ipc:each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for fifteen days.the substantive .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 2006 (HC)

Swaika Properties Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-04-2006

Reported in : RLW2007(1)Raj344

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. challenge in this appeal is to the order dated january 23, 2006 of learned single judge dismissing the writ petition of the appellants whereby the acquisition proceedings of the appellants' land under the provisions rajasthan urban improvement act, 1959 (for short, '1959 act') were called in question.2. contextual facts depict that the appellants tiled writ petition before learned single judge being aggrieved by the process initiated by the respondents for acquisition of land of appellants bearing khasra no. 383 measuring 14 bighas and 16 biswas situated at madrampura. first notice was issued on january 25, 1975 under section 52(2) of 1959 act indicating purpose of acquisition for improvement and purposes of jaipur town extension of civil lines area for construction of buildings. second notice issued under section 52(2) of 1959 act on august 23, 1975 indicated the purpose of acquisition of land for extension of civil lines and planning of housing scheme. appellants submitted objections to the notices. the same were not considered but instead the respondents proceeded to issue notices under sections 52(1) and 52(5) of 1959 act respectively on february 8, 1984 and february 18, 1984 stating the fact of acquisition of land for jaipur development authority. the writ petition filed by the appellants seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of acquisition was dismissed by the learned single judge as indicated above.3. the rival submissions advanced before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2006 (HC)

Ashok Kumar Bakliwal and ors. Vs. Municipal Board and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-04-2006

Reported in : RLW2007(1)Raj405

rajesh balia, j.1. heard learned counsel for the parties.2. the petitio is directed to challenge the demand of conversion charges raised by the respondent municipal board, abu road vide communication dated 22.4.2003 and 16.2.2006 purporting to be in accordance with section 173 a of the rajasthan municipalities act, 1959 (for short 'the act of 1959') as amended vide municipalities amendment act, 1999 w.e.f. 30.9.1999. in addition to challenging the demand on merit within the provisions of section 173a itself, the petitioners have also sought to challenge the constitutional validity of section 173a as amended vide aforesaid amending act and rules framed thereunder for giving effect to it.3. the undisputed facts of the present case are that the petitioners are holding a land which is governed by a patta issued by the erstwhile sirohi state. under the grant, there was no restriction on the nature of use to which the land in question could be put. in other words, the holder of land has no restriction upon user of the land under the grant. according to the petitioners, they had purchased a building constructed on a plot ad-measuring 1809 sq. fts. situated near azad maidan area, abu road from one raghunath prasad s/o shri ramji lal and patta of erstwhile sirohi state stood in favour of shri saju ram, heera lal predecessor in title of raghunath prasad. the nature of patta is not in dispute.4. the petitioners had submitted an application to the municipal board, abu road on 9.4.2003 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 09 2006 (HC)

Ajay Type Writers Vs. Dhanpat Raj

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-09-2006

Reported in : RLW2007(2)Raj1483

n.p. gupta, j.1. this is a defendant's appeal, in a suit for eviction, decreed by both the learned courts below, on the ground of reasonable and bonafide necessity.2. the facts of the case are, that the plaintiff filed the present suit for eviction, alleging interalia, that the property described in para-1 of the plaint belonged to one hastimal. this comprises of two shops on the ground floor, being shops no. 2 and 3, which were purchased along with second storey, by the plaintiff, and the first storey was purchased by the plaintiffs father, from said hastimal, by separate registered sale deeds. both the shops belong to plaintiff, the first storey is of the ownership of the plaintiff's father, while the second storey is in the ownership of plaintiffs, and that plaintiff and his father live in the upper storey, above the two shops. with this it was alleged, that the defendant had become defaulter, as he had taken the shop on rent at a monthly rent of rs. 125/-, and had paid rent upto 30.9.1990. the plaintiff's father is aged 65 years, and is a cardiac patient, haying blood pressure also. earlier the father was carrying on business in the name and style of m/s. ganeshmal bhanwarlal, in the premises of plaintiff uncle's son narpat chand. that firm has been closed, and the premises have been handed over to narpatchand, since 31.3.93. thereafter the plaintiff's father started cloth business in the name and style of m/s. bhanwarlal dhanpatraj, as sole proprietor, in another shop at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2006 (HC)

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Roopkanwar and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-13-2006

Reported in : IV(2006)ACC127; 2007ACJ1394; RLW2006(2)Raj1034

s.n. jha, c.j.1. this special appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single judge dated 1.8.1990 in s.b. civil misc. appeal no. 86/1985 dismissing the appeal of the appellant insurance company under section 30 of the workmen's compensation act, 1923 (in short 'the act')2. in view of the limited controversy involved in this appeal it is not necessary to set out the facts of the case in details. suffice it to mention that one bhagwan singh was employed as khalasi on truck no. rsn 5900 owned by hari singh. on 23.3.1981, driver of the truck tulcha ram, took it to workshop for repairs. while it was being moved inside, the stone pattis of the truck fell over him as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries. he was taken to mahatma gandhi hospital, jodhpur for treatment and he remained hospitalised for about four months. on 8.7.1981 he filed claim petition under rule 20 of the workmen's compensation rules, 1924 before the compensation commissioner, jodhpur, seeking compensation of rs. 23,520/- with costs, interest and penalty against said hari singh as well as the appellant insurance company with which the truck was insured. by award dated 16.2.1985 the compensation commissioner awarded rs. 25,200/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6% from 26.3.1981. he also awarded rs. 12,600/- as penalty. the appeal preferred by the appellant having been dismissed by the learned single judge, it has come in appeal to the division bench.3. mr. arun .....

Tag this Judgment!

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