Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: rajasthan Year: 2004 Page 4 of about 62 results (0.010 seconds)

Jun 01 2004 (HC)

Umesh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jun-01-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2336; 2004(4)WLC214

sunil kumar garg, j.1.this criminal revision petition under section 397 cr.p.c. has been filed by the accused petitioner on 20.4.2004 against the order dtd. 5.4.2004 passed by the learned additional sessions judge no. 3, jodhpur in criminal appeal no, 35/2003 by which the learned additional sessions judge rejected the application filed by the petitioner under section 391 cr.p.c.2. it arises in the following circumstances:i) that on 23.1.1998, a fir was lodged by kailash dadhich against the accused petitioner with the police station udai mandir, jodhpur for offences under sections 279 and 304a i.p.c. alleging inter alia that on 20.1.1998 kailash (p.w.2) and chhotu singh (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) reached caltex petrol pump, jodhpur at about 9.45 p.m. where a scooter no. rj- 19-6m/2979 which was being driver by the accused petitioner came there and the scooter dashed against the deceased after coming on wrong side, as a result of which he fell down and became unconscious as he received injuries on his head and thereafter kailash (p.w.2), umesh (accused petitioner) and rameshwar dadhich (p.w.3) took the deceased to mahatma gandhi hospital and on 23.1.1998, the deceased died in the hospital.ii) on that fir, police started investigation and after investigation the police filed challan against the accused petitioner for offences under sections 279 and 304a i.p.c. on 28.6.99.iii) that after trial, the accused petitioner was convicted and sentenced for offence under .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 2004 (HC)

Vaman Narayan Ghiya Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-26-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2354

sunil kumar garg, j.1. this criminal revision petition under section 397 cr.p.c. has been filed by the accused petitioner against the order dtd. 13.4.2004 passed by the learned additional sessions judge (fast track), chittorgarh in sessions case no. 130/2003 by which he ordered that charges for offence under section 411, 413 and 120b be framed against the present accused petitioner as well as other accused persons, namely, manoj, badal, and madan mohan and also directed framing of charges against virdi chand for offences under sections 411, 413, 120b under section 379-401 i.p.c.2. it arises in the following circumstances:i) on 18.2.1998, one deep chand lodged a report in the police station rawat bhata district chittorgarh stating inter alia that on the night of 15.2.1998, idol of natraj had been stolen away from the temple and upon this, a case for the offence under section 379 i.p.c. was registered and fir no. 41/98 was chalked out and investigation was started.ii) during investigation of the case, the accused petitioner was got arrested on 14.8.2003 and other accused persons, namely, manoj, badal, madan mohan and virdi chand were also got arrested.iii) during investigation, the police found that duplicate stolen idols were got prepared by the accused petitioner and some other accused persons so that fact of stolen of original idols might remain in secret. the alleged duplicate idol of natraj was seized by the police on. 13.11.1998 and the original idol was first sold to .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 13 2004 (HC)

Ramu Ram Vs. Chief Executive Officer and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-13-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(3)Raj1947; 2004(4)WLC12

n.n. mathur, j.1. the instant special appeal is directed against the order of the learned single judge dated 5.9.2003 dismissing the writ petition.2. the appellant was elected as sarpanch of the gram panchayat 14 apd on 31.1.2000. he was served with a notice of meeting dated 21.8.2003 (annex.p/1) for consideration of motion of no confidence against him. he also received a photo stat copy of the proceedings of the meeting of the gram panchayat held on 18.8.2003 presided by upsarpanch. the proceedings shows that a decision was taken in the said meeting to move a motion of no confidence against the appellant. a copy of the proceedings of the said meeting dated 18.8.2003 is placed on record as annex.p/2. appellant expressed his doubt as to genuineness of the document and, as such, he applied to zila parishad for supplying certified copy of proceedings annex.p/2. the appellant challenged the entire proceedings on the ground of being in violation of provisions of section 37(2) of the rajasthan panchayati raj act, 1994, hereinafter referred-to as 'the act of 1994' and rule 21 of the rajasthan panchayati raj rules, 1996, hereinafter referred-to as 'the rules of 1996, appellant-petitioner approached to this court by way of petition under article 226 of the constitution of india. it was contended before the learned single judge that no notice as prescribed in form-i as required by rule 21 of the rules of 1996 was presented before the chief executive officer, as such, the very .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 2004 (HC)

Banshilal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-11-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2316; 2004(3)WLC483

anil dev singh, c.j.1. this appeal is directed against the order of the learned single judge dated april 27, 2004 rendered in s.b. civil writ petition no. 1015/2004. the facts leading to the appeal are as follows.2. the appellant herein was elected as sarpanch of gram panchayat karera in january 2000. a written notice of intention to make the motion expressing want of confidence in the sarpanch, signed by 14 persons out of 21 elected members including the up- sarpanch, was presented before the chief executive officer, zila parishad, bhilwara on 16th february, 2004 along with a copy of the letter requesting the competent authority to place the proposed motion before the panchayat for consideration (annex.p/1 to the writ petition). on receipt of the written notice, the chief executive officer directed the additional chief executive officer to submit report with regard to the identity of the persons who had signed and presented the motion. the chief executive officer by his order dated 20th of february 2004 (annex. p/3 to the writ petition) convened the meeting of the gram panchayat for 4th march at 10 a.m. to consider the no confidence motion against the appellant.3. aggrieved by the order dated 20th february 2004, the appellant fifed a writ petition. in the writ petition, the appellant herein prayed that the order dated 20th of february 2004 (annex.p/3) be quashed and in case the motion if carried out against the appellant, the same may be declared null and void. during the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 2004 (HC)

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Saroj Devi and ors. (Smt.)

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-11-2004

Reported in : III(2004)ACC366; 2006ACJ1316; RLW2004(4)Raj2305; 2004(3)WLC555

prakash tatia, j.1. heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.2. these appeal are against the award dated 17.4,2003 of the motor accidents claims tribunal, bikaner passed in claim cases filed under section 166 of the motor vehicles act, 1988.3. brief facts of the case are that the claimants alleged that on 8.7.1988 at about 10 p.m. victims were travelling in the three wheeler taxi rj. 07.p.0626, tola ram was driving the three wheeler taxi and when taxi reached near the chungi check post just before the municipal boundary of the bikaner, near shiv shakti gas godown, a truck no. rsf 3949 came and hit the taxi and dragged the taxi far away from the road and the truck ran over the three wheeler. the taxi went under the fuel tank of the truck. in this accident, six persons died and the driver of the taxi suffered injuries. all the seven set of the claimants including the driver of the three wheeler taxi submitted claim petitions before the motor accidents claims tribunal, bikaner. the claimants except in the claim case no. 159/98 impleaded parties to the driver and owner of the truck no. rsf 3949 as well as the united india insurance company ltd. who insured the said truck, the claimants also impleaded owner of the three wheeler and the oriental insurance company limited as parties. in the claim case no. 159/98 the claimants impleaded driver, owner of the truck and the insurance company of the truck as parties. all the claim petitions were consolidated and .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2004 (HC)

Ram Chandra Kasliwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-07-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(3)Raj1788; 2004(4)WLC17

anil dev singh, c.j.1. these two appeals are directed against the order dated january 10, 2003 of the learned single judge rendered in sb civil writ petitions nos. 8191/2002 & 8184/2002, to the extent the notification dated july 10, 2002, annexure-3 to the writ petition, issued under section 4 of the land acquisition act, 1894 (for short 'the la act'), has been upheld.2. the brief facts leading to the filing of these two appeals are as follows:on july 10, 2002, twenty feet wide strip of land on either side of bhawani singh road between indira circle and ram bagh circle for the purposes of widening the road was notified by the state under section 4 of the la act. the notification was published in the official gazette. it was also published on july 27, 2002 in two daily newspapers, having circulation in the locality. besides, on august 29, 2002, the district collector, jaipur caused public notice of the substance of the notification in the locality pursuant to the notification under section 4 of the la act, persons interested in the land including the appellant submitted their objections to the land acquisition officer (collector) on august 21, 2002. by a notice dated september 16, 2002 (annexure-6 to the writ petition), the land acquisition officer (collector) invited persons interested in the land to produce oral or documentary evidence in support of their objections. for those persons interested in the land, who had not availed of the earlier opportunity to file objections, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 27 2004 (HC)

Shree Maillikarjun Marbles and Mines Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajasthan Financial ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-27-2004

Reported in : AIR2004Raj212

ordersunil kumar garg, j.1. the petitioner has filed the present writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india on 9-4-2002 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the demand notice /letter dtd. 23-3-2001 (annex. 12) by which demand was raised by the respondent no. 2 (branch manager, rfc, rajsamand) stating that due to oversight mistake interest at the rate of 19.5% was charged, but as per the documents, interest should have been charged @20.5% and the petitioner-firm was directed to deposit the overdues upto 31-3-2001 and the order /letter dtd. 4-5-2001 (annex. 14) issued by the respondent no. 2 (branch manager) by which demand of rs. 2,18,945/- as over-dues as on 30-4-2001 be quashed and set aside and further the respondents be directed to consider the case of the petitioner under the interest reduction scheme (irs) afresh and the respondents be further directed to execute necessary documents for applying reduced rate of interest of 15.5% p.a. with the petitioner and further it may be held that the petitioner was liable to pay interest @19.5% p.a. only.2. the facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under :(i) that the petitioner set up a unit for marble cutting and processing by installation of a gangsaw machine and commenced commercial production on 1-6-1997.(ii) further case of the petitioner is that petitioner was sanctioned a term loan by respondent rfc to the extent of rs. 56 lacs vide .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 27 2004 (HC)

Than Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-27-2004

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2692

o.p. bishnoi, j.1. these three appeals have been filed by the three appellants than singh, gulab singh and ramesh against a judgment dated 23.9.2000 by the learned additional sessions judge, bali, whereby, all the three have been found guilty for the offences punishable under section 302, 302/34 and 341/34 of the 1pc.2. the f.i.r. ex.p/19 was lodged by pw.5 bachchan singh on 26.6.98 at 6.15 pm at police station, 'nana'. according to the f.i.r., the deceased manga! singh (brother of pw 5 bachchan singh) on 26.6.98 had left his village veerampur for going to village 'nana' at 4.00 pm with pw 17 mahendra singh in connection with some domestic work on a motor-cycle. at 5.30 pm on that day, mahendra singh returned to village veerampur and informed bachchan singh that after purchasing some material in village nana, he along with mangal singh was returning to veerampur on a motor cycle. near cremation ground of village nana, on the bank of river 'jawai', the appellant than singh was found standing with a 'dhariya' blocking their path. when the motor-cycle was stopped by mangal singh, the other two appellants gulab singh with a 'kulhari' and ramesh with a 'lathi' came near the motor- cycle. mangal singh enquired from them as to what was the matter. thereupon, the appellant than singh told him that inspite of many attempts, he could not be killed and today they were determined to murder him. thereafter an injury by 'dhariya' was inflicted. pw 17 mahendra singh attempted to save mangal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2004 (HC)

Kan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-26-2004

Reported in : 2004CriLJ3253; RLW2005(1)Raj90

n.n. mathur, j.1. the appellants, in these appeals, arising from the judgment dated 17-1-2002 passed by special judge, sc/st (prevention of atrocities) act cases, jodhpur convicting of offence under section 302, i. p. c. and sentenced to imprisonment for life, nowhere else but in the open jail situated in mandore, jodhpur. before giving factual matrix of the case, it would be convenient to give a prepatory note about the place of occurrence i.e. open jail.2. it is claimed that in the history of prison development in india, the establishment of open prison is the most remarkable innovation. it has opened a new vista in the realm of correctional treatment promising an offender greater freedom, natural surrounding and lesser tension which culminate in creating an atmosphere more conducive to reform himself and to achieve social, moral and economic rehabilitation in the society. the underlying philosophy of administration, mode of maintaining discipline and enforcement of orders and assessment of problems and methods of tackling them, being different from those of the closed prisons, instil a sense of self-esteem and social responsibility among prisoners and ease the pains of imprisonment to a greater extent. the government of rajasthan in exercise of powers conferred under clause (18) of section 59 prisons act, 1894 has framed the rules for sending convicts to open air camps. the preamble of the rules as provided underlying object is as follows:--'preamble.-- whereas it is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 2004 (HC)

Satya NaraIn Modani Vs. Income Tax Officer and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-22-2004

Reported in : (2004)190CTR(Raj)507; [2005]272ITR138(Raj)

1. these appeals are directed against the impugned order of learned tribunal, dt. 13th march, 2003. it was ordered that both the appeals shall 0be disposed of at admission stage.2. the assessee-appellant has raised the following questions of law in gt appeal :'(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the provisions of section 4(1)(a) of gt act were attracted and that there was any deemed gift taxable in the hands of the assessee ?(2) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the nomination of membership seat by the assessee to another person is a transfer of property within the meaning of section 4(1)(a) of the gt act and this is subject to tax as deemed gift under section 4(1)(a) of the gt act ?(3) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the membership seat of a stock exchange is a 'property' within the meaning of the provisions of section 4(1)(a) of the gt act or merely a personal privilege granted to a member by the stock exchange ?(4) whether the deemed gift under section 4(1)(a) of the gt act can be charged to tax with reference to an amount of consideration for which assessee has been charged to income-tax by considering the same amount of consideration as full value of consideration received for the purpose of section 48 r/w section 45 of the it act, 1961 ?(5) whether the burden under section 4(1)(a) of the gt act, 1958, is not on the department to prove the market value of the property transferred and whether .....

Tag this Judgment!


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