Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: rajasthan Year: 2004 Page 1 of about 62 results (0.013 seconds)

Nov 10 2004 (HC)

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Nand Lal Saras ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-10-2004

Reported in : AIR2005Raj112; 2005(2)ARBLR102(Raj); RLW2005(2)Raj946; 2005(2)WLC682

..... settlement and after receiving observations of the parties, the court may reformulate the terms of possible settlement and refer the same for arbitration, conciliation, judicial settlement including lok adalat or mediation, as the case may be. when the dispute is referred for arbitration or conciliation the provisions of the act of 1996 apply as if the proceedings were referred for settlement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 2004 (HC)

Virendra Singh and ors. Vs. Kashiram (Deceased by L.Rs.)

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-06-2004

Reported in : AIR2004Raj196; 2006(1)CTLJ378(Raj); RLW2004(3)Raj1979; 2004(3)WLC711

a.c. goyal, j.1. this is first appeal by the defendants challenging the judgment and decree dated 28-2-1992 whereby learned additional district judge, kishangarhbas decreed the plaintiffs suit. the parties in this appeal shall be referred as arrayed in the plaint.2. the plaintiff sh. kashiram (since deceased) filed a suit on 26-2-1986 for cancellation of a gift deed dated 20-6-1977 and for declaration that the defendant no. 1 sh. virendra singh is not the adopted son of the plaintiff with the averments that agricultural land measuring 15 beeghas 5 biswas as mentioned in para 1 of the plaint and agricultural land measuring 16 and half beeghas as mentioned in para 2 of the plaint is in khatedari and in possession of the plaintiff. the plaintiff is having three daughters -- all married and his wife. the defendants virendra singh and his father deen dayal are also residents of village bheekhawas. the defendant no. 2 sh. deen dayal is an advocate and on account of his contacts with the plaintiff, the plaintiff developed his confidence in defendant no. 2. both the defendants in conspiracy approached the plaintiff and stated that the plaintiff is having about 32 beeghas of land and in case half of this land is transferred by way of will, the plaintiffs land would be saved from ceiling and after some time the will would got be cancelled. thus, taking the plaintiff in confidence the defendant no. 2 got his thumb impressions on a number of papers at mundawar on 20-6-1977 by playing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2004 (HC)

Dr. Vijay Laxmi Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-14-2004

Reported in : [2005(104)FLR1187]; 2005(3)SLJ509(Raj); 2005(2)WLC690

ordersunil kumar garg, j.this writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india, has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 8.9.2004 with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the judgment dated 28.7.2004 (annexure-6) passed by the rajasthan civil services appellate tribunal, jaipur (for short 'the tribunal') by which the appeal of the petitioner against transfer order dated 11.7.2004 (annexure-1) was dismissed and the transfer order dated 11.7.2004 (annexure-1) qua the petitioner by which the petitioner was transferred from mahatma gandhi hospital, bhil wara to shri jawahar hospital, jaisalmer and against the post, which was being held by the petitioner, the respondent no. 4 dr. arun kumar chouhan was posted be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to allow the petitioner to work at the place where she was working prior to issuance of transfer order dated 11.7.2004 (annexure-1) i.e. at mahatma gandhi hospital, bhilwara.2. the case of the petitioner as put forward by her in this writ petition is as follows :the petitioner was working on the post of senior specialist (gyne.) at mahatma gandhi hospital, bhilwara. she was also holding the charge of principal medical officer, bhilwara and shetook the charge of the said post of pmo on 5.3.2004 and for that, copy of the certificate of transfer of charge dated 5.3.2004 is placed on record as annexure-2.thereafter, through impugned transfer order dated 11.7. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 2004 (HC)

Shanti Devi Vs. Nand Lal

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-13-2004

Reported in : AIR2005Raj218; RLW2005(2)Raj1249; 2005(3)WLC203

a.c. goyal, j.1. this is second appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 1.2.2002, whereby learned additional district judge no. 3, jaipur city, jaipur, affirmed the judgment and decree of redemption passed by additional civil judge (junior division) no. 1, jaipur city, jaipur, on 20.8.1997. the parties hereinafter shall be referred as arrayed in the plaint.2. the plaintiff filed a suit on 22.5.1984 for redemption and possession of mortgaged property with the averments that house no. 4784 situated in jaipur as described in para 1 of the plaint was mortgaged with the .defendant vide registered mortgage-deed dated 16.11.1978 only for rs. 16,999/-, for a period of seven years. the value of this property at that time was rs. 60,000/- and the plaintiff never sold this property to the defendant. the cause of action arose to the plaintiff on 29.12.1983 when the defendant represented that she had become absolute owner of this property. the plaintiff was and is still ready to pay the mortgage money and thus the plaintiff is entitled to a decree of redemption of the mortgaged property with possession of the same and the defendant should be restrained not to make any alteration in the said property.3. the defendant vide written statement submitted on 25.5.1985 pleaded that the registered mortgage-deed was executed in compliance of earlier agreement of conditional sale dated 19.4.1976 and it was agreed upon between the parties that the defendant would become absolute .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 2004 (HC)

Chauthu Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-23-2004

Reported in : 2005CriLJ1051; RLW2005(2)Raj775; 2005(1)WLC663

orderprakash tatia, j.1. the facts of the case are that the complainant-manga ram submitted a criminal complaint under sections 420, 465, 466, 467 and 468, i.p.c. read with section 120b. i.p.c. against 11 persons alleging therein that the complainant and the accused nos. 1 to 4 namely, ramu, chautu, sua and chhotu were the co-sharers in agricultural land bearing khasra nos. 231/1, 432/1, 426, 381 and 189 situated in village sunariya and dalatpura. since the complainant-manga ram was not keeping the good health, therefore, his all four brothers (accused) were cultivating the land. the complainant, in his complaint, stated that the accused nos. 2 to 4 were not giving share in the crop also and they started quarrelling with him. not only this but the accused persons by forging thump impression of the complainant, sold the land by registered sale deed dated 14-7-1982. in the complaint, it is submitted that out of two accused, jeevan and kushla, one put his thumb impression representing himself to be the complainant. the complaint was forwarded under section 156(3), cr.p.c. to the concerned police station, upon which case no. 86/1982 was registered. after investigation, the challan was filed against seven accused persons, namely, chauthu, chhotu, sua, jeewan, mal singh, kushala ram and shanker puri for offences under sections 465, 466, 467, 419, 420 and 120b, i.p.c. on 30-11-1984, cognizance against three more persons was taken by the court. those were sohan, bhag chand and madan- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 2004 (HC)

Gopi Kishan Vs. Shanker Lal Dakot

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-03-2004

Reported in : AIR2005Raj114

ordern.p. gupta, j.1. this petition has been filed by the returned candidate, against the judgment of the election tribunal, being learned district judge, bikaner, dt, 12-8-2004, accepting the election petition, and, setting aside the election of the present petitioner, as ward member of ward no. 4 of nagar palika, nokha, in the election held on 21 -8- 2000.2. facts of the case are that elections of municipal board, nokha were held in august, 2000, wherein the petitioner along with other 10 persons filed their nominations, which were scrutinized on 9-8-2000. in that scrutiny, the nominations of shanker lal, pushpa devi and prabhu ram, s/o mangilal were rejected. thereafter in the polling, the present petitioner is said to have polled highest number of votes, being 386 votes, and was declared elected.3. challenging this election, on 19-9-2000 an election petition was filed by the present respondent. the election was sought to be challenged on various grounds, viz., that the returning officer wrongly rejected the nomination of the election petitioner, who had filed nomination as an independent candidate. his nomination was rejected on the ground, that the name of one of the five proposers, viz. dana ram was not found in part no. 7 of the voter list, but was found in part no. 8 for which attention of the returning officer was invited at that time, to the effect that part no. 7 has erroneously been mentioned, and on that count nomination cannot be rejected, still the nomination .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 2004 (HC)

Mohd. Irshad @ Dilshad Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-25-2004

Reported in : RLW2005(2)Raj1106; 2005(1)WLC255

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. the appellant (hereinafter described as 'accused') was placed on trial before the learned special judge (sati nivaran) rajasthan and additional sessions judge, jaipur city, jaipur in sessions case no. 79/1997. learned judge vide judgment dated september 26, 2000 convicted and sentenced the accused for the offence under section 302 ipc to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of rs. 10,000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.2. put briefly the prosecution case is that the informant mohd. shafiq @ babu (pw.6) submitted a written report at 7.00 pm of february 28, 1996 at the police station ramganj, jaipur with the averments that around 5 pm on the said day when he was standing near nagina mandi, irshad, ashfaq and guddu suddenly caught hold of siraj (now deceased) and dilshad inflicted blow on the left armpit of siraj. the police station ramganj jaipur registered a case for the offences under sections 307, 341 and 34 ipc and investigation commenced. injury sustained by siraj got examined, which was described in the injury report (ex.p-10) as under:-'stab incised wound of size 3 x 1cm x depth? placed at lt. side lower part of chest at ant. axillary line. the wound margins are regular and clean cut well defined with fresh bleeding.'since siraj succumbed to the said injury the case was converted under section 302 ipc. post mortem on the dead body was performed vide post mortem report (ex.p-13), according to which deceased .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 2004 (HC)

Pata Ram Bheel Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-20-2004

Reported in : RLW2005(1)Raj415; 2005(1)WLC322

n.n. mathur, j.1. this group of writ petitions has been filed before issuance of the notification for municipal elections seeking direction to- postpone the process of election pointing- out serious defects in delimitation of wards, arbitrary reservation of wards for sc/st, obc & women,2. the main thrust of the challenge is that the delimitation of wards and reservation of seats provided under section 9, 11, 13, and 14 of the rajasthan munici- palities act, 1959, hereinafter referred-to as 'the act of 1959, read with article 243p(g) of the constitution of india have not been done as per the latest census of 2001 but the last census report of 1991. it is not in dispute that the ensuing municipal elections are proposed to be held on the basis of delimitation of wards and reservation of seats as per the last census report of 1991 and not the latest census report of 2001. however, it is submitted inter alia that five years' term of forty five local bodies (corporation/council/board) is going to expire on 28.11.2004. as per the constitutional mandate under article 243u, whereby the elections for the municipal corporations/councils/boards are required to be conducted before expiry of the term but on account of respondent order passed by the delimitation commission, no determination could be made. it is further submitted that no prejudice is caused, as the final electoral roll which is yet to be published, has been prepared on the basis of the latest survey report. a plea has been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2004 (HC)

D.K. Parihar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-19-2004

Reported in : AIR2005Raj171; [2005(105)FLR694]; RLW2005(3)Raj1783; 2004(4)WLC724

ordersunil kumar garg, j.1. heard at the admission stage.2. this writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india has been filed by the petitioner, who is a practitioner lawyer of this court, against the respondents union of india through ministry of law, new delhi and rajasthan high court through registrar general, jodhpur on 20-9-2004 with the prayer that preventive measures be taken to prevent the falling of human values in this court and further, the respondent no. 1 union of india be directed to decide the representation dated 21-6-2004 (ex. 9) made by the petitioner to the minister of law, central government, new delhi.3. from a bare reading of the present writ petition, it appears that the petitioner has filed this petition aggrieved from the conduct, behaviour and judgments passed by some of the hon'ble judges of this court highlighting some of the instances of them. the petitioner has based his petition on several headings such as human values, fight against injustice, all that glitters is not gold, quality of decision, judicial misbehaviour etc. etc.4. the office of this court has listed this petition before the single bench, but according to the petitioner, who himself is a practitioner lawyer of this court, this petition should have been listed before the division bench of this court as according to him, the matter involved in it is of public interest and it should be treated as pil and further, since it has been filed against the high court, therefore .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 2004 (HC)

Mamta (Kumari) and anr. Vs. Sardar Bal Jeet Singh and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-13-2004

Reported in : I(2005)ACC775; RLW2005(2)Raj930

r.p. vyas, j.1. the instant appeal is directed against the award dated january 24, 1995, passed by the judge, motor accidents claims tribunal, jaipur city, jaipur, whereby the claim-petition of the claimants was dismissed.2. before i proceed to discuss the matter, it is relevant to mention the relevant facts of the claim petition. the claim petition was filed by minor kumar mamta d/o. shambhu dayal through her mother and guardian smt. geeta sharma before the tribunal jaipur city, jaipur, which was registered as mact case no. 578/89.3. the brief facts of the case are that claimants' father- shambhu dayal, who had been selected for training of senior teacher, was taking training at that relevant time of the accident and the training was likely to be completed in the months of may, 1979. after the training was over, if appointed as a teacher, he was likely to get rs. 700a per month.4. on july 16, 1979, at 9.30 a.m., shambhudayal has to leave for mahapura. he went to the bus stand, where one bus no. rrm 9927 was said to be ready to leave for mahapura. he boarded the bus. when the bus started, in the way, the conductor asked for ticket, then shambhudayal told that he would like to go to mahapura. then the conductor told him that he had boarded a wrong bus, as the bus in question was going to sirsi. shambhudayal was suggested by the conductor to get down from the bus, because that bus was not going to mahapura. at that time, shambhudayal requested the bus conductor to stop the bus, .....

Tag this Judgment!

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