Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: rajasthan Year: 2004 Page 3 of about 62 results (0.011 seconds)

Sep 02 2004 (HC)

Madan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-02-2004

Reported in : RLW2005(2)Raj902; 2005(1)WLC71

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. since the controversy involved in the instant appeal attracts the provisions contained in the juvenile justice (care and protection of children) act, 2000 (for short 'the j.j. act'), we proceed to dispose of the matter finally at the orders stage.2. as per the prosecution story, the appellant was indicted in criminal case registered at the police station beawar on october 12, 1998. he was arrested and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed. in due course the case came up for trial before the learned additional sessions judge (fast track), beawar. charges under sections 302/34, 307/34, 460/34, 459/34, and 324/34 ipc were framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. the prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 17 witnesses and got exhibited 36 documents. in his explanation under section 313 cr.p.c., the appellant claimed innocence. no defence witness was, however, examined. on hearing the final submissions, the trial judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:-under section 302/34 ipc: to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fineof rs. 1000/-. in default of payment of fineto further undergo 6 months' simpleimprisonment.under section 460/34 ipc:- to suffer simple imprisonment for ten yearsand to pay a fine of rs. 500/-. in default ofpayment of fine to further undergo threemonths' s.i.under section 458/34 ipc:- to suffer simple imprisonment for six yearsand to pay a fine of rs. 400/-. in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 2004 (HC)

Bagtawar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-10-2004

Reported in : 2005CriLJ2636

ordern.n. mathur, j.1. by way of instant revision petition under section 397, cr. p. c. the accused has challenged the order dated 26-4-2003 passed by the judicial magistrate. ist class, ladnu framing charge against the petitioner for offence under sections 279 and 304a, i. p. c.2. it is alleged that on 26-4-2003 a conductor of the rajasthan state road transport corporation lodged an f. i. r. at police station ladnu stating inter alia that the bus bearing no. 999/rj-22 left for pali at about 8.45 p.m. for sujangarh. the bus was driven by the accused bagtawar singh. the bus left the bus-stand deedwana at about 7.30 p.m. from the village sanwarad. seven passengers boarded the bus for ladnu. he issued tickets to all of them. one of them occupied the seat near the gate. when the bus reached near bankaliya bus-stand at about 9 p.m., all of sudden, one of the passengers opened the gate and jumped out. on asking by him and the other passengers the accused stopped the bus. the person who jumped out the bus died on the spot. number of people assembled. he was taken to the hospital. after usual investigation, police filed charge sheet against the accused for offence under section 279 and 304a of the i. p. c.3. having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record i am of the view that the petition deserves to be allowed.4. the deceased, on his own, opened the gate and alighted from the bus, while it was. still, in motion. on asking by the conductor and the passengers .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 2004 (HC)

Genus Overseas Electronics Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-03-2004

Reported in : I(2005)BC340; RLW2005(1)Raj753

k.s. rathore, j.1. the petitioner company is a private company registered under the provisions of the companies act, 1956. the government of rajasthan as also the bureau of industrial promotion took a decision to give incentives to such industries who are interested in setting up a new industrial unit in rajasthan and they were assured that a number of fiscal incentives would be made available for new industries such as capital investment subsidy, sales tax exemption/deferment, octroi exemption, subsidy on d.g. set and testing equipment, etc.2. the petitioner company set up an electronic unit for manufacturing hybrid micro circuits and smt board assembly. the memorandum of understanding was also signed for manufacturing the aforesaid articles with riico on 12.3.1993. in mou also, the petitioner company was assured to provide a facility upto the extent of rs. 45 lacs which included the state subsidy as provided under the state capital investment subsidy scheme for new industries, 1990.3. that state capital investment subsidy scheme for new industries, 1990 (hereinafter to be referred as scheme of 1990) was notified to be operative w.e.f. 1.4.1990 and the same was remained in force upto 31.3.1997. the capital investment subsidy scheme was notified by the government with a view to accelerate the pace of the industrial development in the state of rajasthan.4. the petitioner company set up a plant of electronic unit in sitapura industrial area, jaipur. as per the project submitted .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 2004 (HC)

Hanuman Das Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-22-2004

Reported in : RLW2005(1)Raj180; 2004(4)WLC488

shiv kumar sharma, j. 1. the appellant was the accused on the file of learned special judge, ndps case, chittorgarh bearing case no. 10/98. learned special judge vide judgment dated march 14, 2000 convicted and sentenced the appellant under section 8/18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act (for short 'ndps' act) to suffer r.i. for 10 years and a fine of rs. 1,00,000/- and in default to further suffer r.i. for one year. 2. it is the prosecution case that on november 21, 1997, a search was conducted by the narcotic department headed by one madanlal meena, superintendent, central narcotics bureau, jhalawar at the residential premises allegedly belonging to the appellant at about 6.30 a.m. upon search, opium weighing 3 kg. 200 gms. including the weight of degchi was recovered contained in a degchi covered by a white plastic cloth. necessary memos were drawn. appellant was arrested and after usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed and in-due course, the case came up for trial before learned special judge, ndps cases, chittorgarh. charge under section 8/18 of the ndps cases, chittorgarh. charge under section 8/18 of the ndps act was framed against the appellant, who dented the charge and claimed trial. the prosecution in support of its case, examined as many as 8 witnesses and got exhibited 16 documents. on hearing the final submissions, learned special judge, ndps cases convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above. 3. only argument advanced .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 19 2004 (HC)

Heer Singh and ors. Vs. Jai Singh and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-19-2004

Reported in : I(2005)ACC718; 2006ACJ1858; RLW2005(1)Raj236; 2005(1)WLC293

sunil kumar garg, j.1. this civil misc. appeal under section 173 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the act of 1988) has been filed by the claimants appellants against the judgment and award dtd. 15.5.1989 passed by the learned judge, motor accident claims tribunal, jodhpur in claim cases no. 106/85 and 85/1986 by which he awarded a sum of 60,000/- as compensation to the claimants - appellants on account of death of smt. madan kumari (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) and rs. 200/- on account of damage caused to the hero majestic moped no. rrn 4059 (hereinafter referred to as the moped in question), but this appeal has been filed by the appellants'- claimants who are legal representatives of the deceased for enhancement of the amount of compensation.2. it arises in the following circumstances:i) that the appellants - claimants filed claim petition before the motor accident claims tribunal, jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'tribunal), on 9.12.87 claiming a sum of rs. 3,50,000/- as compensation on account of death of the deceased in the accident alleging inter alia that on 11.10.85 at about 9 a.m. appellant no. 2, vinod kumar along with his mother smt. madan kumari (deceased) was going on moped in question from their residence towards raikabagh bus stand. it was further stated that the moped was being driven by appellant no. 2 vinod kumar and smt. madan kumari (deceased) was sitting as pillion rider on the back of the moped in question. it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 19 2004 (HC)

Anil Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-19-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2736; 2004(4)WLC508

shiv kumar sharma, j.1. instant appeals arise out of the judgment dated november 22, 2001 of the learned special judge, ndps cases chittorgarh rendered in sessions cases no. 7/98, whereby each of the appellants were convicted and sentenced under section 8/18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (for short 'ndps act') to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of rs. one lac in default to further undergo imprisonment for one year.2. the prosecution story as woven is tike this devi lal inspector central narcotic bureau jhalawar camp chittorgarh instituted a complaint against the appellants anil and madhu, wherein it was alleged that on november 6, 1997 madan lal meena on receiving a secret information reached at the spot and found four persons sitting in a hut of madhu. two of them ran away, but madhu and anil were apprehended. the search was taken and 3.600gm. and 4.600gm. opium was recovered from their pos- session. necessary memos were drawn and after usual investigation charge sheet was filed. charge under section 8/18 ndps act was framed against the appellants, who denied the charge and claimed trial. the prosecution in support of its case examined as many as eight witnesses. the appellants in their explanation under section 313 cr.p.c. claimed innocence and three witnesses in defence were examined. on hearing the final submissions learned trial judge convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated above.3. i have reflected over the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2004 (HC)

State Vs. Prakash Chand Kabra and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-13-2004

Reported in : RLW2005(1)Raj662; 2004(4)WLC153

y.r. meena, j.1. these appeals are directed against the similar orders of learned single judge dated 24th july, 2002. as in all these appeals common issue is involved for the consideration of this bench, we have heard all these appeals and decide them by this common order.2. the short controversy involved in these appeals is whether the commissioner has exercised his revisional power, under the proviso to sub-section (2) of the section 14 of the rajasthan motor vehicles taxation act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1951'), in accordance with law?3. the common facts in these appeals are that the petitioners are holding all india permits of tourist buses. the permits for these buses have been granted by the regional transport authority, udaipur. the district transport cum taxation officer, rajsamand determined the road tax and special road tax in respect of motor vehicles of the petitioners. while determination of tax was in the process by the taxation officer, it was considered by him that concerned motor vehicles when travelled out of state of rajasthan for sometime, for such period when the vehicles are out of state of rajasthan, these petitioners are not liable to pay the tax for that period and the petitioner claimed exemption for tax for that period. having been satisfied with the claim of the petitioner, the taxation officer under section 3 of the act of 1951 granted exemption from payment of special road tax for the period for which the motor vehicle was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 06 2004 (HC)

Praveen Kumar and anr. Vs. JaIn Vishva Bharati Institute and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-06-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2528; 2004(4)WLC219

n.p. gupta, j.1. by this writ petition, the petitioners seek quashing of the charge-sheet annexure-8 dt. 24.3.2004, so also order of expulsion, passed against the two petitioners on 31.3.2004 being annexure-9 & 10, and also seek a direction to allow both the petitioners to appear in the final examination of msw course commencing from 19.4.2004, or any other date as notified by the respondents, for the academic session 2003-2004. the directions are sought against the two respondents, being no. 1 jain vishva bharati institute (deemed university) ladnun, district nagour through its vice chancellor, and no. 2 being the registrar, jain vishva bharati institute (deemed university).2. the factual allegations are, that the institute was founded in the year 1970, with the inspiration of late acharya shri tulsi, as a centre of education, literature, culture, social service, meditation and spirituality, with a primary objective of the institute, to provide instruction, training, research, experimentation, in the fields of oriental learning, shraman culture and other related subjects. the institute is imparting education in the field of jainology, science of living and programmes in social work namely; bachelor of social work (bsw), and master in social work (msw) etc. it is alleged, that in the year 1991, by issuance of notification under section 3 of the university grants commission act, 1956, hereafter to be referred to as 'the act.' the institute was notified as deemed university. it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 2004 (HC)

Magna Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-05-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2097; 2004(4)WLC347

n.p. gupta, j.1. vide order dt. 2.3.2000, notice for final hearing was issued. notice of the stay application was also issued. thereafter vide order dt. 29.3.2000, after service of the respondent, the matter was ordered to be listed for final hearing on 10.4.2000. on 10.4.2000, again the matter was ordered to be listed for hearing on 18.4.2000, then arguments were heard, and vide judgment dt. 28.4.2000, the writ petition was allowed. against that order, a d.b. special appeal, being d.b. civil special appeal no. 442/2000, was filed, and vide judgment dt. 13.4.2001, the same was allowed, on the short ground, that in a absence of appearance of appellant (present respondent no. 4), at best, the writ petition ought to have been admitted, and fresh notice ought to have been issued. it was also noticed, that though vakalatnama is said to have been filed on behalf of respondent no. 4, it could not be placed on record, for certain reasons, which were also noticed, and therefore, the order passed was set aside, on account of non-appearance of effected party, respondent no. 4, being due to sufficient cause, and the matter was remanded, to be decided in accordance with law, after hearing the parties.2. thereafter appearance was put in on the side of the effected respondent, and again the matter was heard, after being adjourned on so many dates, the same hon'ble judge directed the record of the case, pertaining to the disqualification of respondent no. 4, to be made available for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 03 2004 (HC)

Ram Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jun-03-2004

Reported in : RLW2005(2)Raj2366; 2004(5)WLC181

rajesh balia, j.1. in these petitions the constitutional validity of section 3 of rajasthan co-operative societies (amendment) ordinance, 2004 has been challenged. as per section 3 of the ordinance, sub-section (2-b) has been inserted in existing section 30 of the co-operative societies act, 2001. the impugned provision provides for contingency where before expiry of the term of the elected managing committee of any society, a new committee is not constituted. in such event, it enables the govt. to direct the registrar of co-operative societies to appoint a government servant as administrator to manage the affairs of the society till a new committee is constituted provided that no member of the committee replaced by an administrator under this sub-section shall be deemed disqualified under sub-section (5) of section 28.2. under the parent act before amendment also an administrator could be appointed to take over the management of a society by removing the existing committee under section 30 (1), but in that event the members of a committee removed under section 30 become disqualified to be a member of a committee, as per section 28 (5) of the act. the act also made provision for amalgamation of two or more co-operative societies under section 13.3. the act of 2001 was reserved for consideration of the president and had received assent of the president. in view thereof, such of the provisions of act of 2001, which provides for any of the matters enumerated in sub-clauses (a) .....

Tag this Judgment!


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