Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 2013 Page 2 of about 57 results (0.011 seconds)

Sep 13 2013 (HC)

Smt Champa and ors Vs. Roop Lal

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Sep-13-2013

d.b. cr. revision petition no. 177/2010 1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order d.b. criminal revision petition no. 177/2010 smt. champa & ors. versus rooplal date of order:13. h september, 2013 hon'ble mr. justice narendra kumar jain hon'ble mr. justice banwari lal sharma mr. sajjan singh with mr. manish rajpurohit, for the petitioners. dr. javed moyal with mr. mohsin dhera, for the respondent. reportable by the court:-(oral) (per jain, j.) this revision petition is directed against the order dated 3rd june, 2009 passed by judge, family court, jodhpur in criminal original case no. 201/2003, whereby application under section 125 cr.p.c. filed by present petitioners was partly allowed. the application of petitioner no.1 smt. champa wife of rooplal was dismissed. application filed by petitioners no. 1 and 2 namely kumari minal and master jatin was allowed and respondent rooplal was directed to pay a sum of rs.750/- per month to kumari minal and rs. 750/- per month to master jatin, towards maintenance, from the date of interim application i.e. 14th january, 2005.2. being aggrieved with the aforesaid order of family court, the petitioners had preferred this revision petition before this court as d.b. criminal appeal under section 19(6) of the family court act, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the act of 1984'), but it appears that d.b. cr. revision petition no. 177/2010 2 a correction was made and it was subsequently described as s.b. criminal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2013 (HC)

Lalit Shanker Vs. Smt,sunder Bai

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Sep-11-2013

d.b. criminal revision petition no. 177/2012. lalit shanker vs. smt. sunder bai // 1 // 19 d.b. criminal revision petition no. 177/2012. lalit shanker vs. smt. sunder bai .. date of order ::11. h september 2013. hon'ble mr. justice dinesh maheshwari hon'ble mr. justice banwari lal sharma mr. prabhat ojha, for the petitioner. mr. anuj sahlot, for the non-petitioner. by the court: (per dinesh maheshwari, j.) preliminary this criminal revision petition, directed against the order dated 20.01.2012, as passed by the family court, udaipur on an application under section 125 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 ( the code / cr.p.c. ), was filed by the petitioner, and was dealt with by the office, as a matter to be laid before a single judge of this court. however, this petition has been placed before the division bench in view of an order passed by a learned single judge of this court on 17.07.2013 holding that this matter is required to be registered as db petition for family courts and matrimonial matters . upon this matter having, thus, been placed before the division bench, on 27.08.2013, a co-ordinate bench posed the obvious question to the parties as to whether a criminal revision petition against the order of the family court under section 125 cr.p.c. would be maintainable before a single judge or before the division bench? d.b. criminal revision petition no. 177/2012. lalit shanker vs. smt. sunder bai // 2 // after having heard the learned counsel for the parties on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 18 2013 (HC)

Saddiqui Mohammad and ors Vs. State (Mines and Geology) and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Oct-18-2013

1 dbcwp (pil) no.4829/2012 saddique mohammad & ors.versus state of rajasthan & ors.in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur ::::: :: order :: d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4829/2012. saddique mohammad & ors.versus state of rajasthan & ors.date of order :: 18th october 2013. hon'ble mr.justice dinesh maheshwari hon'ble mr.justice v.k.mathur mr.s.p.sharma, for the petitioners.mr.g.r. punia sr.advocate & aag with mr.jamwant gurjar, for the respondents nos.1 to 5 & 7. mr.m.s.singhvi, sr.advocate with akhilesh rajpurohit & mr.rajesh joshi, for the respondent no.9 by the court : the instant writ petition has been filed by 13 petitioners as public interest litigation ( pil ) stating grievance against the mining operations being carried out by the respondent hindustan zinc limited near village agucha, tehsil hurda, district bhilwara. the petitioners have stated the summary of the cause to maintain this writ petition as pil in the following:- thus, this writ petition in the nature of public interest litigation, is filed by the humble petitioners.who are agriculturists (farmers.residing in village angucha in tehsil-hurda, district bhilwara, wherein concern of petitioner is about danger to life and liberty of residents of this village and other adjoining villages, due to on going aforesaid blasting carried out for mining operation, by the respondent company, i.e., hindustan zinc limited (now merged with vedanta group of industries) under mining lease, granted by 2 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2013 (HC)

Saint Shri Asharam Bapu Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Oct-01-2013

[1].21 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur s.b.criminal misc.bail application no.7115/2013 (saint shri asharam bapu versus state of rajasthan) date of order : : 01.10.2013 hon ble ms.justice nirmaljit kaur mr.ram jethmalani, sr.counsel assisted by mr.anjani kumar singh and mr.pradeep choduhary, counsel for the petitioner. mr.anand purohit, aag & senior advocate assisted by mr.pradhuman singh and mr.mahipal bishnoi, counsel for the state. mr.manish vyas and mr.kapil purohit, counsel for the complainant. ms.chanchal mishra, investigating officer. reportable the present bail application has been filed under section 439 cr.p.c.the petitioner has been arrested in connection with fir no.122/2013, p.s.mahila thana (west) jodhpur for the offence under sections 342, 376, 354-a, 506, 509/34 of the ipc, sections 23 & 26 of the juvenile justice (care and protection of children) act, 2000 and under section 8 of the protection of children from sexual offences act, 2012. the matter was taken up for hearing on 16.09.2013. at the outset, the learned additional advocate general sought adjournment on the ground that the case-diary was not available. however, learned senior counsel, shri ram jethmalani, was allowed to commence his arguments. the arguments were heard at length and the matter was adjourned to 18.09.2013 as [2].requested by the state to enable them to produce the case-diary, on which date, the learned counsel for the state concluded his arguments. however, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2013 (HC)

Pema and ors Vs. Board of Revenue and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Sep-11-2013

s.b. civil writ petition no.6496/2013 pema and ors. v/s the board of revenue and ors. order dt:11. 9/2013 1/3 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order s.b. civil writ petition no.6496/2013 pema and ors. v/s the board of revenue and ors. date of order :::11. h september, 2013 present hon'ble dr. justice vineet kothari mr.deelip kawadia, for the petitioner. -- by the court:1. the petitioners pema, rama and nava, all sons of devaji dangi have approached this court by way of present writ petition under article 227 of the constitution of india being aggrieved by the order dtd.12.3.2013 of the board of revenue dismissing the revision petition no.ta/303/2013/udaipur pema and ors. v/s smt. panna bai and anr which was filed against the order dtd.27.12.2012 passed by the learned sub divisional officer, girva in appeal no.33/2010 whereby on an application filed by one smt. panna bai w/o gega ji dangi, who claimed to be daughter of heera lal, whose land in question stood mutated in favour of the present petitioners and smt. panna bai claimed that she was the only daughter of deceased heera lal and mutation enteries were required to be made in her favour condoning the delay of almost 35 years, the sdo s.b. civil writ petition no.6496/2013 pema and ors. v/s the board of revenue and ors. order dt:11. 9/2013 2/3 instituted an enquiry as to whether smt. panna bai w/o sh. gega ji was real and the only daughter of the deceased hera lal.2. mr. deelip kawadia, learned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 25 2013 (HC)

Rajesh Dwivedi Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Jul-25-2013

1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur :order: rajesh dwivedi vs. state of rajasthan & others (s.b. civil writ petition no.7429/2013) date of order : july 25th, 2013 present hon'ble mr. justice gopal krishan vyas ____________________________________ reportable mr. hanuman singh choudhary for the petitioner. mr. r.l. jangid, addl. advocate general. counsel for the petitioners in the writ petitions mentioned in schedule-a appended to this judgment/order : mr. a.k. rajvanshi, dr. pushpendra singh bhati, dr. nupur bhati, mr. arjun purohit, mr. h.s. sidhu, mr. sanjay mathur, mr. shambhoo singh, mr. v.n. kalla, mr. m.s. godara, mr. s. sarupariya, mr. vinod purohit, mr. sanjeet purohit, mr. c.s. bissa, mr. v.k. bhadu, mr. p.r. mehta, mr. amit dave, mr. bharat devasi, mr. r.a. vaishnav, mr. v.r. choudhary, mr. r.s. choudhary, mr. j.r. chawel, mr. deepak nehra, mr. j.khan, mr. shardul bishnoi, mr. manoj pareek, dr. rakesh kumar sinha, mr. bharat shrimali, mr. rajesh bishnoi, mr. pankaj awasthi, mr. bhanwar singh, mr. himmat jagga, mr. b.r. godara, mr. rajesh dadhich, mr. r.s. rathore, ms shalli gajja, mr. t.s. rathore, mr. jamwant gurjar, mr. b.r. chahar, 2 mr. ram lal gora, mr. inderjeet yadav, mr. kailash jangid, mr. dhirendra singh, mr. j.s. bhaleriya, mr. a.s. rathore, ms pintoo pareek, mr. b. raj bishnoi, mr. j.s. bhaleria, mr. b.s. tanwar, mr. h.r. chawla, ms anjali gopa, mr. k.c. choudhary, mr. m.r. choudhary, mr. kan singh oad, mr. r.s. chouhan, mr. s.k. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 2013 (HC)

Yashpal Singh Chaudhary Vs. State of Raj. and anr

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Aug-19-2013

[1] in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur **** :judgment: yashpal singh chaudhary vs. state of rajasthan & anr. d.b. civil writ petition no.12093/2010 writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of in- dia date of judgment:19. h august, 2013 present hon'ble the chief justice mr. amitava roy hon'ble mr. justice p.k. lohra mr. dipesh beniwal, legal representative of the petitioner, in person. mr. v.k. mathur, assistant solicitor general of india for re- spondent no.2, rajasthan high court. mr. anand purohit, additional advocate general, assisted by mr. pradhuman singh, for the respondent state. reportable by the court (per hon'ble lohra, j):1. this legal battle was launched at the behest of a compulsorily retired judicial officer for assailing the impugned order dated 31st of march 2010 (an- [2] nex.9), and after his unfortunate demise in ut- trakhand gory tragedy, is pursued by his legal representatives.2. scorning the checkered history of the case, the brief facts giving rise to this litigation are that at the threshold of his judicial career, the petitioner was appointed as munsif & judicial magistrate vide order dated 16th of july 1980 under rule 21 of the rajasthan judicial service rules 1955 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as the rules of 1955). pursuant to order dated 16th july 1980, the peti- tioner joined his duties on 29th of july 1980 and was made substantive on the post of munsif & ju- dicial magistrate vide order dated 11th april .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 2013 (HC)

M/S. Shiva Mines and Mineral Vs. State of Raj. and anr

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Sep-12-2013

s.b.c.w.p. no.2231/2009 m/s shiva mines and minerals v/s state of rajasthan & anr. order dt:12. 109/2013 1/8 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order s. b. civil writ petition no.2231/2009 m/s shiva mines and mineral v/s state of rajasthan & anr. date of order :::12. h september 2013 present hon'ble dr. justice vineet kothari mr. j.l.purohit, sr. advocate assisted by mr.n.r. budania, for the petitioner. mr. r.l. jangid, aag & sr. advocate with mr. k.k. bissa, for the respondents. --- 1. the petitioner in the present case has challenged the levy of land tax vide the demand notices dated 05.06.2008 (annex-5), under the provisions of rajasthan finance act, 2006 for assessment years 2006-07 raised by the assessing authority, (sub-registrar), kolayat.2. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent-assessing authority has not given reasonable opportunity of hearing and has issued demand notices without complying with the principles of natural justice and demand of land tax is illegal. therefore, the impugned assessment order and demand notice deserve to be set aside.3. since in the writ petition, vires of rule 24 (i) of the rajasthan land tax rules, 2006 has also been challenged, the said s.b.c.w.p. no.2231/2009 m/s shiva mines and minerals v/s state of rajasthan & anr. order dt:12. 109/2013 2/8 challenge does not survive in view of division bench decision of this court in the case of g.k.w. vs. state of rajasthan reported in 2008 (3) wln 1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 2013 (HC)

Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Raj. and anr

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Sep-13-2013

s.b.c.w.p. no.11750/2009 vijay kumar sharma v/s state of rajasthan & anr. order dt:13. 109/2013 1/8 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order s. b. civil writ petition no.11750/2009 vijay kumar sharma v/s state of rajasthan & anr. date of order :::13. h september 2013 present hon'ble dr. justice vineet kothari mr. j.l.purohit, sr. advocate assisted by mr.n.r. budania, for the petitioner. mr. r.l. jangid, aag & sr. advocate with mr. k.k. bissa, for the respondents. --- 1. the petitioner in the present case has challenged the levy of land tax vide the demand notice dated 24.7.2009 (annex-10), under the provisions of rajasthan finance act, 2006 for assessment years 2009-10 raised by the assessing authority, (sub-registrar), bikaner.2. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent-assessing authority has not given reasonable opportunity of hearing and has issued demand notices without complying with the principles of natural justice and demand of land tax is illegal. therefore, the impugned assessment order and demand notice deserve to be set aside.3. since in the writ petition, vires of rule 24 (i) of the rajasthan land tax rules, 2006 has also been challenged, the said s.b.c.w.p. no.11750/2009 vijay kumar sharma v/s state of rajasthan & anr. order dt:13. 109/2013 2/8 challenge does not survive in view of division bench decision of this court in the case of g.k.w. vs. state of rajasthan reported in 2008 (3) wln 1.in which the validity of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 2013 (HC)

Suresh Kumar and ors Vs. State (Finance) and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Sep-17-2013

1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order suresh kumar & ors. vs. state of rajasthan d.b.civil writ petition no.10493/2011 under article 22 of the constitution of india. date of order: september 17, 2013 p r e s e n t hon'ble the chief justice mr.amitava roy hon'ble mr.justice p.k.lohra mr.m.s.singhvi, sr.advocate, with mr.manoj bhandari) mr.hemant dutt ) for the petitioners. mr.g.r.punia, sr.advocate, assisted by mr.r.s.choudhary) for the respondents. by the court : (per hon.mr.amitava roy, c.j.) 1. petitioners, who are presently working as court masters with this court at its principal seat at jodhpur, seeks judicial intervention for grant of third selection grade on completion of 27 years of service with consequential benefits including interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the accrued arrears. in addition, annulment of clause(iii) of para 2, clause (iii) of para 4 and para 5 of the circular dated 17.2.1998, so far as it concerns the court masters, has been prayed-for. a declaration that persons working on the post of court masters are entitled to third selection grade, equivalent to the pay scale of the post of assistant registrar; 2 alternatively, a declaration that the third selection grade cannot be less than 8000-13500, has been sought for as well.2. we have heard mr.m.s.singhvi, sr.advocate, with mr.manoj bhandari & mr.hemant dutt, appearing for the petitioners and mr.g.r.punia, sr.advocate, assisted by mr.r.s.choudhary, for the respondents. .....

Tag this Judgment!


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