Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: rajasthan jodhpur Page 2 of about 2,877 results (0.144 seconds)

Jul 24 2015 (HC)

Dinesh Chandra Somani Vs. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara an ...

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

By the Court: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dated 20.11.2000 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara ('the Tribunal'), whereby, the findings have been recorded against the petitioner and the Tribunal has directed summoning of the petitioner for enquiry under Section 340 Cr.P.C. The petitioner, an Advocate, represented one Harak Lal in a petition for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act'). During the pendency of the petition, an application came to be filed by the insurer Oriental Insurance Company Limited, inter alia, contending that the claimant had received a sum of Rs. 1,61,724/- for the damage to the Jeep by filing Complaint No. 2/1998 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhilwara ('District Forum'); on account of receipt of cheque towards compensation, the claim petition was not maintainable and it was prayed that as the claimant has suppressed the fact and has filed the...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 2015 (HC)

Mohd. Umar and Others Vs. State of Rajasthan and Another

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

By Cr Misc Petition No.3560/2014, challenge is made to the order dated 29.5.2014, passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metropolitan, dismissing the application moved by the petitioners for declaring the proceedings taken against them as null and void ab initio so as the order dated 28.6.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.13, Jaipur Metropolitan on criminal revision petition against the order dated 29.5.2014. A further prayer is to declare remand of accused petitioners as null and void so as the custody and they may be discharged and set at liberty. The petitioners have also challenged the order dated 21.6.2014 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jaipur (in Cr Misc Petition No.3420/2014), order dated 18.8.2014 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jaipur (in Cr Misc Petition No.3798/2014). The challenge to the aforesaid orders have been made on the same grounds as have been urged in the main Cr Misc Petition No.3560/2014 and separa...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 2015 (HC)

Sundra Sodha Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions to the respondents to grant her admission to undergraduate programme leading to Bachelor's Degree in discipline of Mining Engineering [B.E. (Mining)] in the College of Technology and Engineering, Udaipur, while extending benefit of reservation under the women category. 2. The facts leading to filing of the present petition are that the Board of Technical Education, Rajasthan, issued an advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates for admission to first year of undergraduate programme in different disciplines of Engineering in Government aided and private unaided technical institutions of Rajasthan (except BITS Pilani, MNIT Jaipur and other deemed and private Universities) for the academic session 2014-15 through Rajasthan Pre-Engineering Test-2014 ('RPET-2014'). 3. The petitioner being eligible to participate in RPET-2014 filled up the application form online and appeared in the examination. The resul...

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2015 (HC)

Rakesh Dhariwal Vs. Balaji Marble Mines, Makrana and Others

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Govind Mathur, J. 1. To question correctness of the judgment dated July 25, 2013, these appeals are preferred. 2. In brief, facts of the case are that M/s Balaji Marble Mines, Makrana came to be registered as a partnership firm as per provisions of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1932') with M/s Mukesh Kumar Rinva, Bhanwarlal Aukna, Bhanwarlal Choudhary, Rakesh Kumar Dhariwal and Kanaram Burdak as its partners. 3. On 25.4.2009 out of five partners named above two partners viz. Rakesh Kumar Dhariwal and Kanaram Burdak said to have signed a dissolution deed to retire from the firm. All the partners, thus, said to have submitted to the Registrar of Firms an application in prescribed form 'E'. As a consequent to the same a change was made in the constitution of the firm and out of five only three persons viz. Shri Mukesh Kumar Rinva, Bhanwarlal Aukna and Bhanwarlal Choudhary were kept as partners of the firm. 4. Acting upon an application submitted ...

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 2015 (HC)

Vishal Kaushik Vs. Family Court and Another

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, Vishal Kaushik, challenging order dated 26.07.2013, whereby seven applications filed by him, respectively on 15.06.2013(Annesure-3), 21.06.2013(Annexure-4 and 5); 28.06.2013(Annexure-7); 19.07.2013(Annexure-8, 9 and 10), were dismissed by Family Court, Ajmer(for short `the Family Court'). 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Haridwar(Uttarkhand) in September, 2008. In that application, the petitioner alleged that Respondent No. 2-wife(for short `respondent-wife`) caused mental cruelty to him by different means, especially because she had extra marital affairs with a person named Kapil Rana, with whom she even had physical relationship. She used to constantly meet him at various places including at the flat of said Kapil Rana and petitioner's flat. Respondent-wife contested the divorce petition by filing wr...

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 2015 (HC)

A.C.T.O., F/S, Sirohi Vs. M/s. Parashavnath Iron Store, Ajmer

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

(Oral): 1. The learned Tax Board by the impugned order dated 05.03.2008 had rejected the appeal of the Revenue and upheld the deletion of penalty under Section 78 (5) of the RST Act upon checking of goods viz. old iron scrap on the ground that ST-18A Form and other necessary documents were not available with the goods in transit while maintaining the order dated 13.10.2000 of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). The relevant findings of the Tax Board in the order impugned is quoted herein below:- ( HINDI ) 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 01.10.2000, a goods vehicle No.RJ-32/G-0549 was intercepted and checked by the Revenue authority and it was found that the documents accompanying the goods were not in accordance with the relevant legal provisions and, therefore, thus proceedings under Section 78 (5) of the RST Act were initiated and a penalty of Rs.43,454/- was imposed on Assessee vide order dated 04.11.2000. Upon a challenge being laid by the respondent-Assessee by...

Tag this Judgment!

May 22 2015 (HC)

The President, Ajmer Adhyogik Karmachari Sangh, Ajmer Vs. The Judge, L ...

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

1. The instant writ application witnesses a challenge to the award dated 6th September, 1996, passed by the Labour Court, Ajmer. The President, Ajmer Adhyogik Karmachari Sangh, Ajmer, (hereinafter referred to as 'petitioner-Sangh', for short), in the writ application, has prayed for the following relief(s):- "(A) Call for the relevant file LCR No.4/96(35/84- Ajmer Udyog Karmachari Sangh V/s M/s Toshniwal Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ajmer) from the Respondent No.1. (B) To issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction and thereby quash and set aside the Award Ex.3 and consequently declar "lay off" of workman of Servashri Dhan Singhi, Shanker Singh and Ratan Singh (vide Ex.1/Ex. M-3 and Ex.2/ Ex.-M-5) as illegal, unlawful and invalid. (C) Issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction and thereby direct the manangement to pay to the aforesaid workmen the arrears of wages with all consequential benefits, deducting the amount already paid to them. (D) Costs of this writ petition be also allowed to t...

Tag this Judgment!

May 15 2015 (HC)

Monika @ Mona Vs. Chandra Prakash

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Ajay Rastogi, J. 1. Instant appeal has been filed by the plaintiff-appellant (wife) aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 29.05.2013 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Kota whereby the suit for divorce filed at the instance of the plaintiff-appellant on the ground of cruelty by the defendant-respondent (husband) came to be dismissed. 2. The appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff-appellant (wife) and the respondent herein is husband. The petition, filed by the wife claiming divorce u/Sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, came to be dismissed by the Family Court vide judgment and decree dated 29.05.2013 despite two salient facts came on record that (1) in the FIR No.219 dated 12.09.2007 registered against the defendant-respondent (husband) at Police Station Mahila Thana, Kota for offence u/Sec.498-A, 406 and 120-B IPC after regular trial, the defendant-respondent (husband) was convicted u/Sec.498-A IPC and sentenced to undergo two years imprisonment vide judgment dated 12.10.2012, howev...

Tag this Judgment!

May 15 2015 (HC)

Hanuman Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

By the Court: (Nisha Gupta, J.) 1. This D.B. Cr. Appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C., has been filed against the judgment dated 10.12.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.1, (Fast Track) Kota in Sessions Case No. 63/2007 whereby the present appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- under Section 302 IPC: to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo three months simple imprisonment. 2. The short facts of the case are that PW/2 Kishan Gopal lodged a written report (Ex.P/2) at Police Station Sangod, Distt. Kota with the contention that he is resident of Kuradia Kala. From last two years Chotu Lal is working with him as Hali (agricultural labourer). On 2.3.2007 in the night mustard crop was being cut and stored on his agricultural field. Chotu Lal went to sleep in the agricultural field to guard the crop but when he had not returned in the morning, he sent Ghasilal, another labourer to the field and he informe...

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 2015 (HC)

Rahul Verma Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

Bela M. Trivedi, J. 1. The petitioner, in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for issuance of directions against the respondent No.2-Jaipur Municipal Corporation to register the marriage of the petitioner under the Christian Marriage Act, 1872 and to issue a marriage certificate to that effect. He has also prayed to declare that the petitioner is entitled to register his marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 in case he is not desirous to register his marriage under Christian Marriage Act, 1872, and that the respondent No.3 i.e. the District Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Jaipur, in absence of Christian Marriage Registrar, is empowered to register the Christian marriages. 2. The short facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner, who had married one Ms. Vanessa Lee Peterson, at the Souvenir Hotel, New Atish Market, Gopalpura Bye Pass, Mansarovar, Jaipur on 08.12.2014, as per the Christian Customs and Ritu...

Tag this Judgment!


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