Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: rajasthan Year: 1995 Page 1 of about 80 results (0.011 seconds)

Mar 27 1995 (HC)

Tejbhan and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-27-1995

Reported in : 1996WLC(Raj)UC640; 1995(1)WLN295

..... bikaner and remained there for one month and did not turn to hanumangarh during those days. on pouring the water, the fire extinguished. dw 5 jagdish roy is the alleged mediator of the maitiage, has stated that he arranged the marriage of shakuntla with accused satya bhagwan but no talks.regarding the dowry amount took place nor any amount was agreed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 1995 (HC)

Anandi Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-19-1995

Reported in : AIR1996Raj154; 1996(2)WLC36

ravani, c.j. 1. where no period of limitation is prescribed under the relevant provision of the statute, can the power be exercised by the authority at any time? the question has arisen in this appeal under section 18 of the rajasthan high court ordinance, 1949 in the context of exercise of powers by the board of revenue after a period of about 25 years under section 82 of the rajasthan land revenue act, 1956 and under section 232 of the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955. 2. this appeal arises out of the judgment and order passed by the learned single judge in sb civil writ petition no. 184 of 1987 decided on january 19, 1987. by the aforesaid order, the learned single judge confirmed the judgment and order passed by the board of revenue in lr reference no. 38 of 1984/ kota. 3. the facts giving rise to this appeal, are as follows :-- the dispute pertains to a land admeasuring 43 bighas and 9 biswas, situated in the village -- ulthi tehsil and district -- baran. the land was originally in the name of pujari laxminarain temple. sometime in the year 1951, the pujari died. the land was ordered to be resumed and confiscated to the state as per order dated jaunary 20, 1955 passed by the commissioner, kota. in other words, the land was a 'muafi' land inasmuch as after death of the pujari of laxminarain temple, no one was there to claim the land. by way of escheat, it was ordered to be resumed by the state. 4. on oct. 14, 1955, the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 (for short 'the act of 1955') .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 18 1995 (HC)

Ram Chandra and ors. Vs. Rajasthan State Road Trans. Corporation and o ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-18-1995

Reported in : 1996ACJ736; 1996(2)WLC146

b.r. arora, j.1. these two appeals arise out of the judgment/award dated 14.1.1987 passed by the judge, motor accidents claims tribunal, jalore, by which the learned judge of the tribunal dismissed both the claim petitions filed by the appellants-claimants on the ground that the tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the claims.2. briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 22.11.1983 nathu rarn, the driver of the rajasthan state road trans. corporation, at about 4.30 p.m. parked the bus no. rrm 1473 at the bus stand, jalore. the bus was to commence its journey to bhinmal. the booking of this bus started. the passengers bought the tickets from the booking window and after buying the tickets, boarded the bus. rukmani w/o ram chandra alias ram kishan, indra d/o ram chandra, manju d/o kesri mal, bajrang s/o ram chandra, bhanwari d/o misri mal and other passengers boarded the bus after buying the tickets. defendant no. 5, banshi lal, also boarded the bus. he was carrying one big jerrican and two containers of five litres each containing kerosene oil. banshi lal, in order to smoke biri, lit the match-stick. the kerosene caught fire and on account of the flames of the fire, rukmani, indra and manju got severe burn injuries. they were taken to the hospital in an ambulance where they succumbed to the injuries. rukmani breathed her last on 24.11.1983 while indra died on 23.11.83 at about 4.00 p.m. ram chandra, the husband, kailash and bajrang, the sons of deceased rukmani, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 1995 (HC)

Kanhaiya Lal Vs. Hari Singh

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-15-1995

Reported in : AIR1996Raj182

arun madan, j. 1. this civil second appeal under section 100, c.p.c., 1908 has been preferred to this court against the judgment and decree, dated 7th march, 1995 passed by addl. district judge no. 7, jaipur city, jaipur whereby the first appellate court partly allowed the appeal on the ground of default preferred by the defendant-appellant while maintaining the decree for eviction of the appellant from the suit premises on the grounds of nuisance and sub-letting.2. the facts giving rise to the filing of this appeal briefly stated are that a civil suit for eviction of the defendant-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'appellant') from the suit shop situated in old sabji mandi behind johari bazar, jaipur, was filed by the plaintiff-respondent (hereinafter, referred to as the 'respondent'). it was alleged in the suit that the suit shop was rented out to the appellant at the rate of rs. 45/- per month and that it was an old tenancy. the plaintiff filed the said suit for eviction of the appellant on three grounds under section 13(1)(a), (d) and (e) of the rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950 (for short as 'the act'), i.e., that the tenant had neither paid nor tendered the amount of rent due from him for six months, that the tenant had created nuisance or had done any act which is inconsistent with the properties for which he was admitted to the tenancy of the premises or which is likely to affect adversely the landlord's interest therein and that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1995 (HC)

Virendra Nath Soral Vs. Sajjan Kumar Jain

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-05-1995

Reported in : 1996CriLJ2564

orderarun madan, j.1. this contempt petition filed on behalf of the petitioner, arises out of breach of undertaking dated 4-4-1995 furnished by the respondent-contemnor before this court in civil review petition no. 36 of 1995 arising out of s.. b. civil first appeal no. 57 of 1995 decided on 23-3-1995. the petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent and eviction against the contemnor sajjan kumar jain and m/s. goyanka exhibitors pvt. ltd. in the court of district judge, jaipur city, jaipur. the said suit was decreed on 13-1-1995 in accordance with law.2. it has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that a suit was filed in respect of a residential premises no. d-23, sarswati marg, bani park, jaipur against the defendant-contemnor for his eviction on the ground that the suit premises were taken on rent @ rs. 7000/- p.m. for the purpose of running,guest house and office. eviction was sought on the ground that the contemnor had violated the condition of the tenancy and the premises were not kept in proper condition and the arrears of rent w.e.f. 10th september, 1990 were due against the contemnor. it was further contended that the premises in question had been sub-let by the contemnor to m/s. goyanka exhibitors by parting with its possession during the subsistence of tenancy in violation of the terms of the agreement. eviction was also sought on the ground of personal bona fide necessity.3. after framing the issues and hearing both the parties, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1995 (HC)

Radhey Shyam and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-24-1995

Reported in : AIR1996Raj134; 1996(3)WLC757

orderarun madan, j.1. the above-named petitioners have filed this writ petition in the matter of interpretation of relevant provisions of the rajasthan urban improvement trust act, 1959 (for short uit act) and jaipur development authority act, 1982 (for short jda act) and in the matter of rajasthan housing board act, 1960 (for short rhb act).2. the facts giving rise to the filing of these writ petitions, briefly stated, are that the petitioners are khatedar tenants having helf share each in respect of agricultural land bearing khasra nos. 181 and 227 measuring 2 bighas 9 biswas in village jhalana doongar district jaipur. the petitioners have been in continuous cultivatory possession of the aforesaid land since the time of their ancestors and have also constructed their residential houses over the said land which are also used for agricultural activities and for keeping of the cattle and fodder etc.3. it has been contended in the writ petitions that a resolution was passed by u.i.t. jaipur on 1-1-1976 whereby the government of rajasthan sought to acquire the petitioners' aforesaid lands for the planned development of jaipur city. the resolution was followed by a notification published under section 52(2) of the u.i.t. act 1959 for determining compensation by agreement. it has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that the compensation was determined subject to the following terms and conditions :--1. the compensation for barani land (unir-rigated) @ rs. 10,000/- per .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 1995 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Madan and Co.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-22-1995

Reported in : (1996)131CTR(Raj)459

b. r. arora, j. :the tribunal, jaipur bench, jaipur for the asst. yr. 1986-87 referred the following question of law under s. 256(1) of the act for the opinion of the high court :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was legally justified in cancelling the order of cit passed under s. 263 and in holding that the unpaid sales-tax liability, if paid within time allowed under the sales-tax act, should not be disallowed by virtue of s. 43b of the it act ?'2. the material facts on the basis of which the above question of law is to be decided is similar to those in db it ref. no. 9 of 1992, cit vs. achal dass dhanraj decided on 27th march, 1995, [reported at (1995) 128 ctr (raj) 325]. the question referred for the opinion of the high court is identical with the question which were referred in db it ref. no. 9 of 1992. while answering the reference in db it ref. no. 9 of 1992 this court held that :'the tribunal was justified in directing that the amount of unpaid sales-tax liabilities to the last date of previous year could not be disallowed if it is found to have been paid subsequently, within the time allowed under the relevant sales-tax act. the proviso to s. 43b for that purpose is to be interpreted as clarificatory and applicable to the assessment years from 1984-85 to 1987-88.' 3. for the reasons given in d. b. i. t. ref. no. 9/92 cit vs. m/s achaldass dhanraj (supra) decided on 27th march, 1995 the question referred is also answered in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1995 (HC)

Rajasthan Trade Union Kendra Vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-13-1995

Reported in : (1996)IILLJ347Raj; 1996(1)WLC418

ordera.p. ravani, c.j.1. on january 10, 1983, jk synthetics ltd. declared lay off in all its fourplants at kota. almost simultaneously the company retrenched 2367 workmen engaged therein. the roots of this litigation are in the aforesaid events. the principal question which has surfaced fordeter-mination by the court is - has the industrial tribunal jurisdiction to raise and adjudicate issue regarding 'closure' of a pof a plant in absence of any point of dispute in this behalf having been referred to it. this and other related questions are required to be examined and answered by the court in these matters.2. all these matters pertain to the industrial disputes which arose between j.k. syntheticsltd., kota (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') and its workmen. at the request and withthe consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, all these matters have been heardtogether and they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.factual background3. the company was incorporated as an investment company sometime in may 1953. it started manufacturing operations at kota in rajasthan in march 1962 by commencing its nylon plant. it has three other plants viz. tyre cord plant, synthetic staple fibre plant and acrylic plant, at kota. it has a cement complex in district chittorgarh and it has also engineering facilities at calcutta, kanpur and dadri. all these matters are in relation to the four plants at kota. the total strength of workmen employed in these .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1995 (HC)

Rathi Gum Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-13-1995

Reported in : [1996]218ITR583(Raj)

b.r. arora, j.1. the income-tax appellate tribunal, jaipur bench, jaipur, at the instance of the assessee, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of the high court :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in not allowing the claim as was allowed by it in the cases of other assessees such as rajasthan udyog and associated stones orders of the same bench in respect of the following items : rs. ps.(1) railway freight2,32,997.45(2) assessment fees mudadani loading charges23,747.78(3) weighment charges243.25(4) godown rent5,909.25(5) book charges2,264.40(6) custom ship bill120.00(7) bardana3,018.47.'the assessee, rathi gum industries, jodhpur, for the assessment year 1979-80 claimed weighted deduction under section 35b of the income-tax act, 1961, on various items of expenses aggregating to rs. 4,13,959.35. the inspecting assistant commissioner, i.e., the assessing authority, allowed the claim of the assessee to the tune of rs. 380 only on some of the items. dissatisfied with the order passed by the assessing authority, the assessee preferred an appeal before the commissioner of income-tax (appeals), jodhpur, who has held that the 13 items mentioned in the order will qualify for weighted deduction under section 35b and directed the assessing authority to pass an order accordingly. the revenue, aggrieved of the order passed by the commissioner of income-tax (appeals), jodhpur, preferred an appeal before the tribunal. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1995 (HC)

Rajmal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-03-1995

Reported in : 1996ACJ1166; AIR1996Raj80

orderarun madan, j. 1. this order will dispose of the above application for compliance of order, dated 22-9-1989 passed by this court in s. b. civil writ petition no. 3967/1989 filed by the applicant-petitioner. this court while disposing of the writ petition allowed the same in terms of its order, dated 22-9-1989 with the direction to the state government for conducting thorough inquiry into the matter and the circumstances resulting in the death of the petitioner's wife smt. lalitabai while she was being operated for laproscopic tubectomy on 2nd april, 1989 at primary health centre, gangapurcity, district sawaimadhopur. this court had also directed vide the said order that a high level inquiry to be initiated into the matter so as to ascertain the cause of death of smt. lalitabai and to fix the responsibility for negligence, if any, on the concerned doctor. it was further directed that if the circumstances leading to the death of the petitioner's wife were accidental on account of carelessness and negligence on the part of the doctor then appropriate compensation shall be paid by the state government to the petitioner within two months from the said date.2. pursuant to the above directions of this court an inquiry was conducted into the matter by the enquiry committee constituted by the state government. the said enquirycommittee submitted its report to the state government on 15-7-1992. the conclusions as well as the recommendations of the said committee mentioned in the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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