Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: rajasthan Year: 1992 Page 1 of about 36 results (0.011 seconds)

May 27 1992 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R.Y. Durlabhji

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-27-1992

Reported in : [1995]211ITR178(Raj)

..... whether the allegation made by john ashlyn was a fact, as the parties, according to john ashlyn, happen to be the ultimate parties connected in the said transaction through the mediator, john ashlyn. to our mind, this would be a necessary document in the light of the alleged letter from eastrade emerald corporation dated march 17, 1967, addressed to salas, which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 1992 (HC)

Suja and ors. Vs. Ram NaraIn and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-23-1992

Reported in : AIR1992Raj163; 1992WLN(UC)536

n.c. kochhar, j.1. this appeal under section 100 of the code of civil procedure is directed against the judgment and decreedated 13-4-1985 passed by the learned civil judge, sambhar lake in civil appeal no. 3/82 (1/84) arising out of the judgment and decree dated 1-2-1982 passed by thelearned additional munsif, sambhar lake in civil suit no. 4/73 (bt.1/81). the brief facts are as under: -2. laxmi narain (the deceased) was the khatedar of the agricultural land in dispute situated in village phagi of district jaipur. he died on 10-3-1958 and after his death ram narain (the defendant no. 1), claiming to be the adopted sort of the deceased, claimed the khatedari rights in respect of the above said land and mutation in his favour was sanctioned on 11-8-1958. the defendant no. 1 sold a part of the property in dispute to bhoora mehravar son of ganga bux (the defendant no. 2), a party to jagdish son of shri bux. (defendant no. 3) and another part to bajrang son of suja (the defendant no. 4) and executed sale deeds in their favour. bhoora son of lala (the plaintiff), who was the predecessor-in-interest of the present appellants instituted a suit staling that the deceased had left behind no heir of class-1 and that he was the nearest relation of the deceased and had as such inherited his rights in the property in dispute and that the defendant no. 1 was a distant relation of the deceased and had not acquired any right in the estate left behind by him and that the sale deeds executed by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 1992 (HC)

Magni Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-04-1992

Reported in : 1992(1)WLN158

b.r. arora, j.1. this appeal is directed against the judgment dated june 30, 1984, passed by the additional sessions judge, nagaur, by which the appellant magni ram was convicted under sections 302 and 447 ipc and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of rs. 100/-, and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment under section 302 ipc, and three months' rigorous imprisonment under section 447 ipc. both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. the incident, which led to the prosecution of the appellant magni ram, took-place in the field of smt. sukhi of village guda bhagwandas in district nagaur in the morning of october 2, 1983. when smt. sukhi was murdered by accused- appellant. magni ram. the report of the incident was lodged at police station, panchori (district nagaur) at 12.30 p.m. by pw 11 gulla. it was averred in that written report by pw 11 gulla that about ten years before, magni ram (the appellant) was adopted by shri (late) binja ram meghwal-the husband of smt. sukhi. after the death of binja ram, accused magni ram turned smt. sukhi out of the house and forcibly took possession over the agricultural field. thereafter she took half of the field from magni ram and started living separately. this was the bone of contention between smt. sukhi and accused magni ram. smt. sukhi is the maternal grand-mother of the informant gulla (pw 11). magni ram wanted to turn smt. sukhi out of the agricultural field .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 03 1992 (HC)

State of Rajasthan Vs. Munga Ram and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-03-1992

Reported in : 1992(1)WLN598

rajesh balia, j.1. this is an appeal by the state against the judgment of learned addl. sessions judge, churu dated 20th december, 1975 in sessions case no. 20 of 1975 whereby the acused respondents munga ram alias adram, dalvir singh, ranvir singh, dhoop singh, mst. chandrawati and mst. shanti were acquitted of the offences under sections 148, 447, 302/149, 307/149 and 324 i.p.c. with which they were charged-with.2. the prosecution case is that disputed field khasra no. 127 measuring 17 bighas and 4 biswas is situated in piru ki dhani of village lutana sadasukh tehsil rajgrah distt. churu. according to prosecution, the disputed field belongs to complainant party kishan gopal, deceased, and his sons amilal, banwari & shivdan and his other brothers. accused dhoop singh, ranvir singh and dalvir singh are three real brothers and cousins of the complainant party. accused mst. chandrawati is the wife of accused ranvir singh and mst shanti is the wife of accused dhoop singh and accused munga ram is the father of accused mst. shanti and mst. chandrawati who are real sisters. the occurrence took place on 21.6.1975 at about 6 a.m. according to prosecution, complainant party has cultivated the field of khasra no. 127 some days before the date of occurrence. at about 5.30 a.m. on 21.6.75, kishan gopal, deceased, when he returned from call of nature to his home, informed his sons shivdan singh, ramchander and banwrilal that accused persons are overturning their fields and he alongwith .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1992 (HC)

Bhanwaroo Khan Vs. Azim Khan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-14-1992

Reported in : 1993(1)WLC491; 1992(2)WLN146

b.r. arora, j.1. this appeal is directed against the decree and judgment dated august 1, 1977, passed by the district judge, churu, by which the learned district judge dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and maintained the decree and judgment dated 9-9-69, passed by the learned civil judge, ratangarh.2. plaintiff-appellant bhanwarro khan, sabdal khan, jassu khan and adam khan (sons of mishri khan) filed a suit in the court of the civil judge, ratangarh, against azim khan and mehboob khan for declaration and perpetual injunction with respect to the land bearing khasra no. 164 measuring 46 bighas and 1 biswa. it was averred in the plaint that bhopal khan the grand father of the plaintiffs and father of mehboob khan, was the khatedar of the land measuring 46 bighas 1 biswa in khasra no. 464 situated in the rohi of town sujangarh. after the death of bhopal khan, his two sons mishri khan (the father of the plaintiff) an mehboob khan, who is the other son of bhopal khan, were entered as the khatedar tenants. on june 9, 1951, the ancestral property was partitioned between mishri khan and mehboob khan-the two sons of bhopal khan and this partition was entered into a bahi. as per this partition, 41 bighas 4 biswas of land of khasra no. 192 came to the share of mehboob khan while 46 bighas 1 biswa of the land of khasra no. 464 came to the share of mishri khan and both remained in possession of their respective land since 9-6-1951. it was further averred in the plaint that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 1992 (HC)

Prakash Lal Mathur Vs. State of Raj. and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-03-1992

Reported in : 1992(1)WLN185

rajesh balia, j.1. petitioner in the above petition seeks a mandamus against the respondents to carryout their obligation to provide him employment under the rajasthan (recruitment of dependents of govt. servant dying while in service) rules, 1975, hereinafter called as the rules of 1975'.2. it is stated by the petitioner that his father madan mohanlal mathur was working as patwari in tehsil osian distt. jodhpur. he died while he was in service on 13-4-1964. at that time when the petitioner's father died, petitioner was only about three years of age, his date of birth being 30th sept. 1962. petitioner having passed higher secondary in the year 1979, also obtained polytechnic diploma in engineering and has also cleared i.t.i. examination. it is contended by the petitioner that when his father expired, the rules of 1975 were not in force and no employment was offered to the dependents of the deceased government employees. when rules of 1975 came into force, the same were made applicable prospectively that is to say they were made applicable only in the case of govt. servants died after 2nd of sept. 1972, the date with effect from which the rules were brought into force. however, when the petitioner came across a decision of this court in shahsi kant v. state of rajasthan reported in 1991 rlr p. 586 that the applicability of the rules to the dependents of the person who died while in govt. service on or after 2nd sept. 1972 has been held to be ultravires to the extent it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 1992 (HC)

Narayan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-06-1992

Reported in : 1992(3)WLC9; 1992WLN(UC)327

inder sen israni, j.1. this appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated march 15, 1990 passed by learned additional sessions judge, gangapur city, in sessions case no. 26/89, whereby the appellant was convicted under section 302 ipc. he has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also fine of rs. 500/-. in failure of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for 6 months.2. briefly stated, pw 1, man singh filed a written report (ex.p.l) on april 25, 89 at about 9.30 p.m. stating that at about 7.00 p.m. after taking his food, while he was playing with his small child at his house, his kaka kallu singh and surjilal & his wife were quarrelling amongst themselves. at that time, narayan singh accused-appellant son of surjilal went inside his kacchahouse and came out with a gandasi in his hand and gave blow with gandasi on head of deceased kallu singh. thereupon, he shouted as to what accused had done. accused narayan singh thereafter went inside his house. when he tried to pick-up injured kallu singh, brother of accused shambhu singh, who was armed with a stick, threatened him to go-away from there and started abusing him. he tried to hit him with his stick, but his wife savitri bent over him, therefore, he did not receive blow of stick. profuse blood was coming out from head of injured kallu singh. this incident was seen by ladies living in the 'guhadi'. his kaka prahlad singh was also present at that time and saw this incident. thereafter, other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1992 (HC)

Ram Chandra Singh Vs. Matadeen and State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-08-1992

Reported in : 1992(1)WLN2

m.r. calla, j.1. this is an application under section 438(3) of the code of criminal procedure for cancellation of bail order passed on 9th august 1991 in sb. cr. misc. bail application no. 2535/1991.2. accused-non-applicant matadeen son of jassu singh applied for his bail under section 439, cr. pc. in sessions case no. 18/1991, pending in the court of addl. sessions judge, neem-ka-thana for offences under sections 302, 147,148, 342, 323 and 364, ipc. when this bail application no. 2535/1991 came up before the court, an order was passed on 9th august, 1991, which shows that the court was given an impression that the case of matadeen was not different than that of the other two co-accused persons, namely chhagan singh & shivpal singh who had been granted bail on 8th august, 1991.3. shri k.n. shrimal has invited my attention to the order dated 8th august, 1991, by which shivpal singh and chhagan singh were granted bail. it has been clearly mentioned in this order dated 8th august, 1991 that, 'the fatal injury was the head injury, which, it appears, had been inflicted by matadeen singh, who is not petitioner before this court . shri shrimal has then referred to the order dated 9th august 1991, by which matadeen was granted bail. this order shows that the court felt inclined to grant bail to matadeen on the basis that the case of chhagan singh and shivpal singh was not different.4. firstly, the very order dated 8th august, 1991 itself shows that the case against matadeen was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 1992 (HC)

Manoj Kumar and anr. Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-13-1992

Reported in : 1992(1)WLN13

b.r. arora, j.1. the petitioners, by this writ petition, have challenged the order dated october 11, 1991, passed by the member, state transport appellate tribunal, rajasthan, jaipur, by which the operation of the order dated august, 1, 1991, passed by the regional transport authority, bikaner, granting non-temporary stage carriage permit in favour of the petitioners on suratgrah- mile 80 route was stayed.2. the petitioners were granted non-temporary stage carriage permits on suratgarh -mile 80 via piperan-236 r.d.-bhopalpura etc. route by the regional transport authority, bikaner, by its order dated august 1, 1991. in pursuance to the order dated august 1, 1991 annexure.4 on record), the petitioners obtained the permit and started plying their vehicles. against the order dated august 1, 1991, passed by the regional transport authority, bikaner, ram kumar (the respondent no. 3) preferred a revision petition before the state transport appellate tribunal, rajasthan, jaipur. alongwith the revision petition, an application for grant of stay was, also, moved by mr. ram kumar and the learned member, state transport appellate tribunal, rajasthan, jaipur, by its order dated october 11, 1991, stayed the operation of the order dated august 1, 1991, till further orders.3. heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent no. 3-the caveator.4. it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the member, state transport appellate tribunal, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1992 (HC)

Madan Singh Vs. the Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd. and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-30-1992

Reported in : 1992(1)WLN73

r.s. verma, j.1. petitioner madan singh is an employee under the respondents. he entered the service of the respondents as a driver. his date of birth was recorded in the service book and service record as 30.6.1926. however, the petitioner did not know his exact date of birth. in a dispute between the employees of the respondents and the respondents an award was made by sarvashri kashi nath pandey and b.b. thakur pratap singh. term no. 12 of this award was as follows:2 it was agreed that for the purpose of retirement the age given in the p.f. will be considered as correct age but in disputed case the record in respect of age may be corrected in the light of school leaving certificate, age given in insurance policy or any other documentary proof. in order to ascertain the age given in the provident fund record every workman will be informed about his age as given in the provident fund record and in case he does not produce any evidence as stated above challenging the correctness of his age as recorded the age recorded will be considered as correct. if any employee is forced to retire on the ground of ill health or infirmity the same has to be certified by the factory medical doctor first but in case where there is dispute over such certificate the certificate of the civil surgeon will be considered as final.the cases of the workman who have been retired some time back on the ground of being over age will be scrutinised and those who will be found within the age prescribed for .....

Tag this Judgment!


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