Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 2013 Page 3 of about 57 results (0.015 seconds)

Nov 09 2013 (HC)

Suo Moto Vs. Dist. Education Offi., Jodhpur and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Nov-09-2013

dbcwp (pil) no.4321/2013 1 16 d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 suo moto versus district education officer, jodhpur & ors.date of order :: 9th november 2013 hon'ble mr.justice dinesh maheshwari hon'ble mr.justice v.k.mathur suo motu mr.v.k.mathur ].ms.nupur bhati ]., court commissioners mr.g.r.punia, sr.advocate & aag with mr.mahendra choudhary, mr.c.s.kotwani ].mr.manoj bhandari ].mr.b.p.mathur ]., for the respondents. at the request made by the court, the learned counsel mr.v.k.mathur and ms.nupur bhati have visited the gaushala maidan today. the court commissioners have also snapped a few pictures of the site on their instruments; and have shown the same to us. what has been given out is that the task of cleaning and restoring gaushala maidan to the hygienic conditions has commenced only a couple of days back. if is, of course, given out that today the work was being seriously attended at by the employees of the municipal corporation, jodhpur. the learned court commissioner mr.v.k.mathur also informs that during his survey and inspection, he has found that the lawns, though laid, are not being properly maintained; and even the gardeners appear not to have been given specific directions nor the superior authorities are regularly supervising the work. it was submitted way back on 03.10.2013 by the learned counsel mr.c.s.kotwani appearing for the municipal corporation, jodhpur that necessary and continuing steps had been taken to dbcwp (pil) no.4321/2013 2 ensure .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 2013 (HC)

Ashok Jindal Vs. State and anr

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Feb-05-2013

1. s.b. criminal misc. petition no. 166/2013 (ashok jindal vs. state of rajasthan & anr.) date of order :5. 2.2013 hon'ble mr. justice sandeep mehta mr. g.j.gupta, for the petitioner. mrs. rajlaxmi choudhary, public prosecutor. the instant misc. petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking a direction for concurrent running of the sentences awarded to the petitioner in criminal case no.1003/2009 and in criminal case no.916/2009. the petitioner was tried in both the aforesaid cases for the offences under sections 138 of the n.i. act. the learned magistrate by judgment dated 22.11.2010 passed in criminal case no.916/2009 convicted the petitioner for the offence under section 138 of the n.i. act and sentenced him to undergo six months' simple imprisonment and directed compensation of rs.15,000/- to be paid to the complainant. the appeal filed against the said judgment was dismissed on 16.6.2012. the learned magistrate in another case by judgment dated 19.2.2011 passed in criminal case no.1003/2009 convicted the petitioner for the offence under section 138 of the n.i. act and sentenced him to undergo six months' simple imprisonment and directed compensation of rs.20,000/- to be paid to the complainant. the appeal filed against the said judgment was dismissed on 16.6.2012. now, the petitioner approached this court by way of instant misc. petition and prays that the sentences awarded to 2. him in the aforesaid two cases should be directed to run concurrently. having .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 2013 (HC)

Mahender Kumar Vs. State and anr

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Sep-02-2013

1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur :order: s.b. civil writ petition no.9352/2013. (mahender kumar vs. state of rajasthan & others) date of order : september 02, 2013 present hon'ble mr. justice gopal krishan vyas ____________________________________ mr. k.s. oad for the petitioner. mr. yashpal khileri, dy. govt. counsel. by the court : in this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief : (a)- by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the notice inviting application for filling up the vacant posts nurse gr.ii in regular manner may kindly be quashed and set aside as the same does not provide selection and appointment to the candidates like the petitioner, who are not having experience to get the bonus marks. (b)- by an appropriate writ, order or 2 direction, the benefits of bonus marks extended to those candidates who are having experience may kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondents may kindly be directed to made selection and appointment by way of conducting competitive written examination. (e)- any other appropriate order or direction, which this hon'ble court deem just and proper be passed in favour of the petitioner. (f)- costs of this writ petition may kindly be allowed to the petitioner. the main contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the provision for providing bonus marks to the candidates having experience on different posts is violative of article 14 of the constitution of india, so also, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 2013 (HC)

Lrs of Pat Ram Vs. Bhajanlal @ Bhajan Singh and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Feb-12-2013

(1) in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order d.b. civil review petition no.94/2011 in d.b. civil special appeal (writ) no.02460/2008 lrs of patram versus bhajan lal @ bhajan singh & ors. date of order ::12. 02.2013 present hon'ble mr. justice govind mathur hon'ble mr. justice banwari lal sharma mr. sukesh bhati for the review-petitioner mr. chaitanya gahlot for the respondents (lrs of patram) by the court : in the year 1971-72, a piece of land measuring 18 bighas 8 biswas in chak no.2dd murabba no.162/62 was allotted to one mr. patram (now deceased) for temporary cultivation. a lease deed was accordingly executed. mr. patram submitted an application as per the provisions of sub-clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of rule 5 of the rajasthan colonisation (allotment of government land to post 1955 temporary cultivation lease holders and other landless persons in the rajasthan canal project area) rules, 1971. the competent authority in the year 1974 arrived at the conclusion that (2) temporary cultivator mr. patram was entitled to have allotment of 12 bighas 4 biswas of land for permanent cultivation. a challenge to the same was given by mr. patram with assertion that the entire chunk of land measuring 18 bighas 8 biswas was supposed to be allotted to him being unirrigated part of land. the claim of above-named patram came to be accepted under an order dated 17.05.1978. accordingly, a direction was given to allot 6 bighas 6 biswas of land to mr. patram. suffice to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2013 (HC)

Anil Chouhan Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Aug-30-2013

d.b. cr. appeal nos.256/1987 & 296/1988 1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur judgment (1) d.b. criminal appeal no.256/1987 anil kumar chouhan v/s. state of rajasthan. (2) d.b. criminal appeal no.296/1988 state of rajasthan vs. anil kumar chouhan d.b. criminal appeals against the judgment and order dated 22.07.1987 passed by sessions judge, jodhpur in sessions case no.37/1985. date of judgment ::30. h august 2013 hon'ble mr. justice dinesh maheshwari hon'ble mr. justice v.k. mathur mr. mahesh thanvi for the appellant. mr. a.r. nikub, public prosecutor for the state. by the court: these two appeals, one by the accused and another by the state, arising out of the same sessions case, and preferred against the same judgment and order, have been heard together; and are taken up for disposal by this common judgment. the accused-appellant anil kumar chouhan and also the state of rajasthan have challenged the judgment and order dated 22.07.1987 passed by the sessions judge d.b. cr. appeal nos.256/1987 & 296/1988 2 jodhpur in sessions case no.37/1985, whereby the learned judge has convicted the accused-appellant anil chouhan for the offence under section 304 part-ii ipc and has sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment thereof, to undergo nine months' rigorous imprisonment; has further convicted him for offence under section 309 ipc and sentenced him to six months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of rs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2013 (HC)

State Vs. Anil Chouhan

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Aug-30-2013

d.b. cr. appeal nos.256/1987 & 296/1988 1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur judgment (1) d.b. criminal appeal no.256/1987 anil kumar chouhan v/s. state of rajasthan. (2) d.b. criminal appeal no.296/1988 state of rajasthan vs. anil kumar chouhan d.b. criminal appeals against the judgment and order dated 22.07.1987 passed by sessions judge, jodhpur in sessions case no.37/1985. date of judgment ::30. h august 2013 hon'ble mr. justice dinesh maheshwari hon'ble mr. justice v.k. mathur mr. mahesh thanvi for the appellant. mr. a.r. nikub, public prosecutor for the state. by the court: these two appeals, one by the accused and another by the state, arising out of the same sessions case, and preferred against the same judgment and order, have been heard together; and are taken up for disposal by this common judgment. the accused-appellant anil kumar chouhan and also the state of rajasthan have challenged the judgment and order dated 22.07.1987 passed by the sessions judge d.b. cr. appeal nos.256/1987 & 296/1988 2 jodhpur in sessions case no.37/1985, whereby the learned judge has convicted the accused-appellant anil chouhan for the offence under section 304 part-ii ipc and has sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment thereof, to undergo nine months' rigorous imprisonment; has further convicted him for offence under section 309 ipc and sentenced him to six months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of rs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 2013 (HC)

State of Raj. and ors Vs. Mohammed Usman

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Oct-25-2013

d.b.civil special appeal (w) no.687/2013. state of rajasthan & ors.versus mohammed usman (with two similar matters.1 55 d.b.civil special appeal (w) no.687/2013. state of rajasthan & ors.versus mohammed usman 60 d.b.civil special appeal (w) no.915/2013. state of rajasthan & ors.versus mukesh kumar 61 d.b.civil special appeal (w) no.916/2013. state of rajasthan & ors.versus satpal madan .date of order :: 25th october 2013. hon'ble mr.justice dinesh maheshwari hon'ble mr.justice p.k.lohra dr. sachin acharya ].mr.vijay purohit ]., for the appellants. by the court: having heard the learned counsel for the appellants in these three similar nature intra-court appeals filed by the state of rajasthan and its officers in the excise department and having perused the material placed on record, we are unable to find even a wee bit of reason to consider interference. in these appeals, the appellants seek to question the similar nature orders dated 03.05.2013, as passed in cwp nos.273/2013, 265/2013, and 274/2013 respectively, whereby, the learned single judge of this court has admitted the respective writ petitions preferred by the licencees of the liquor shops, on their grievance against the demand of enhanced license fees, which was raised after an alleged survey about location; and has confirmed the interim orders dated 10.01.2013 whereby, recovery of the impugned demand was ordered to remain stayed. this court has, time and again, observed that the question of d.b.civil special appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2013 (HC)

Shiva @ Savaram Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Nov-08-2013

1/43 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8609/2013 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8610/2013 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8609/2013 shiva @ savaram vs. state of rajasthan s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8610/2013 sanchita gupta @ shilpi vs. state of rajasthan date of order :08. 11.2013 hon'ble mr. justice kanwaljit singh ahluwalia mr. mahesh bora, senior advocate assisted by mr. nishant bora, for the petitioners. mr. anand purohit, additional advocate general assisted by mr. mahipal bishnoi, for the state. mr. manish vyas & kapil purohit, for the complainant. ***** today, s.b. criminal misc. bail application no.8609/2013 preferred by shiva @ savaram and s.b. criminal misc. bail application no.8610/2013 instituted by sanchita gupta @ shilpi are listed. both the petitioners have been named as accused in case fir no.122/2013 registered at women police station, jodhpur (west), jodhpur corresponding to fir no.0/13 registered at police station kamla market, new delhi. the fir has been registered for offences under 2/43 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8609/2013 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8610/2013 sections 342, 376, 354(a), 506 and 509/34 of ipc and section 23, 26 of juvenile justice (care and protection of children) act 2000 and section 8 of protection of children from sexual offences act, 2012. it has been very fairly submitted that during pendency of these petitions, charge sheet has been filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2013 (HC)

Sanchita Gupta @ Shilpi Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Nov-08-2013

1/43 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8609/2013 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8610/2013 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8609/2013 shiva @ savaram vs. state of rajasthan s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8610/2013 sanchita gupta @ shilpi vs. state of rajasthan date of order :08. 11.2013 hon'ble mr. justice kanwaljit singh ahluwalia mr. mahesh bora, senior advocate assisted by mr. nishant bora, for the petitioners. mr. anand purohit, additional advocate general assisted by mr. mahipal bishnoi, for the state. mr. manish vyas & kapil purohit, for the complainant. ***** today, s.b. criminal misc. bail application no.8609/2013 preferred by shiva @ savaram and s.b. criminal misc. bail application no.8610/2013 instituted by sanchita gupta @ shilpi are listed. both the petitioners have been named as accused in case fir no.122/2013 registered at women police station, jodhpur (west), jodhpur corresponding to fir no.0/13 registered at police station kamla market, new delhi. the fir has been registered for offences under 2/43 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8609/2013 s.b. cr. misc. bail application no.8610/2013 sections 342, 376, 354(a), 506 and 509/34 of ipc and section 23, 26 of juvenile justice (care and protection of children) act 2000 and section 8 of protection of children from sexual offences act, 2012. it has been very fairly submitted that during pendency of these petitions, charge sheet has been filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 2013 (HC)

Brahaman Swarnkar Samaj, Pali and ors Vs. Shri Medh Kshatriya Swar. S. ...

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Decided on : Dec-10-2013

1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur :order: s.b.civil writ petition no.11025/2013 brahaman swarnkar samaj, pali & ors.versus shri medh kshatriya swarnkar samaj vikas samiti, pali & anr. date of order :: 10th december, 2013 present hon'ble mr.justice arun bhansali mr.r.k.thanvi senior advocate assisted by mr.narendra thanvi, for the petitioners.mr.c.p.soni, for respondent no.1. mr.bhupendra singh, for respondent no.2. ---- by the court: this writ petition is directed against order dated 17.07.2013 passed by the additional civil judge (junior division) no.1, pali, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner- defendant no.1 seeking to question the admissibility of the document has been rejected. brief facts of the case may be noticed thus: the respondent no.1 plaintiff filed a suit for cancellation of trust deed, getting it declared void and for permanent injunction against the petitioner-defendants, inter alia, seeking relief for cancellation of trust deed registered on 31.05.1997 by the defendant samaj and permanent injunction in the nature not to interfere in the right of the plaintiff to worship in the temples, which were subject matter of the trust deed. 2 the suit was, inter alia, founded on an agreement dated 15.07.1968 said to have been executed qua the temples between the parties. the relevant portions of the plaint read thus:- (5) ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??? ???? ?? ? ???? ?? ??" ?? ? ? ? ?? ?? ? ??? ? ? ?? ?" ? ? ? ?? ? ? ?? ? ?? ? .....

Tag this Judgment!


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