Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 452 (RAJ)

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD. v. SURENDRA KUMAR DECEASED THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

CMA/5522/2018 · 2026-03-10

Sandeep Taneja

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:10247] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5522/2018 1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Ltd., Parivahan Marg Jaipur (Registered Vehicle Owner Roadways Bus No. Rj 14 1P 3161) 2. Hanuman Sahai Pareek S/o Sh. Narain Pareek, R/o Near Priyadarsani School Sainthal Mode Dausa At Present Station Incharge Dausa Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Dausa Depot (Receiver Vehicle Owner Bus No. Rj 14 1 P 3161) ----Appellants Versus 1. Surendra Kumar Deceased Through his Legal Representatives, R/o Village Arnia Thana Gangapur City District Sawaimadhopur (Raj) 2. Dinesh Kumar Tiwari S/o Sh. Radheshyam Tiwari, R/o Village Kalota Tehsil Dausa District Dausa (Driver Bus No. Rj 14 1P 3161) 3. Ramgopal S/o Jelaram (Father), Aged About 67 Years, R/o Village Arnia Thana Gangapur City District Sawaimadhopur (Raj) 4. Babita W/o Ramgopal (Mother), Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village Arnia Thana Gangapur City District Sawaimadhopur (Raj) 5. Harimohan S/o Ramgopal (Brother), Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Arnia Thana Gangapur City District Sawaimadhopur (Raj) 6. Anju D/o Ramgopal (Sister), Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village Arnia Thana Gangapur City District Sawaimadhopur (Raj) 7. Sunil S/o Ramgopal, Aged About 15 Years, (Minor Through His Natural Guardian Babita (Respondent No. 2 ) R/o Village Arnia Thana Gangapur City District Sawaimadhopur (Raj) ----Respondents [2026:RJ-JP:10247] (2 of 2) [CMA-5522/2018] For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Gautam for Mr. Satish Chandra Mittal For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 10/03/2026 1. Learned counsel for the appellants upon instruction submits that appellants have already deposited the entire awarded amount. Hence, appellants are not interested in pursuing the instant appeal any more. 2. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed as not pressed. 3. All pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J AVINASH GULERIA /86