Rajasthan Court October 1950 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Amarsingh Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-10-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj42
Dave, J.1. This is an appeal by the accused Amar Singh, who has been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nim Ka Thana, on 19-5-1950 under Sections 449 and 307, Penal Code and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 250 or six months simple imprisonment in default of its payment on each count. Both sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The facts of this case are that on 20-9-1949 at about 5 P. M. one Gopal Singh Rajput, resident of Bagoll village, lodged a report at the police station, Torawati. It was alleged that the accused, who was an absconder and an associate of dacoits, had made a criminal trespass in their house (Raola) at about 3 P. M. that day armed with a gun. It was further alleged that the accused was labouring under a suspicion that the informant and other occupants of that house had given shelter to his aunt and concealed her in their house and, therefore, he told them that she should be brought out. An effort was made to con...
Madholal Vs. Bridhichand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj58
ORDERSharma, J.1. This is an application by Madholal defendant to revise the order of the learned Judge, Karauli, remanding the case to the Court of the Munsif, Karauli, for decision according to the observations made in the appellate judgment. Originally, the defendant filed a second appeal but on the objection of the counsel for the opposite party that; no appeal lay against the order of the appellate Court, the defendant made an application that the appeal might be treated as a revision, as no appeal lay against the order of the lower Court. The facts giving rise to the revision are as follows; The plaintiff opposite party filed a suit against the defendant-applicant on the ground that he had been paid Rs. 300 by the plaintiff on 8-10-1943 for the purpose of purchasing 4 Mds. of Ganja from Sanawar in erstwhile Indore State, 2 Mds. of Genja valued at Rs. 150-11 was purchased by the defendant and made over to the plaintiff, Rs. 19-7 were spent on railway fare. Thus only Rs. 172-2 were...
Widow of Harikishan and anr. Vs. Bheek Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-04-1950
Reported in: AIR1952Raj58
Kshem Chandra Gupta, J. 1. This is a miscellaneous Second Appeal in execution proceedings. The appellants had obtained a decree on the 10th of April, 1912 for Rs. 355/4/- against the respondents. The petition for its execution out of which this appeal arises was filed on the 22nd of December 1948, in the Court of the Munsiff, Phalodi. It was considered as barred by time and dismissed on the ground that a period of more than 24 years had elapsed even after the Council Resolution dated the 8th of April, 1921, published in English in the Marwar Gazette of May 21st 1921, and in Hindi in the same Gazette of May 28, 1921, whereby decrees could be kept alive only for 24 years, and for another 6 years in exceptional cases. An appeal was taken to the Additional Sub-Judge, Jodhpur, who also dismissed the same on the 5th of October 1949. Hence this appeal.2. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that the above mentioned Council Resolution had no retrospective effect and could not apply to d...
Keshri Prasad Vs. Bodhraj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj45
ORDERRanawat, J.1. Under the Jhalawar Municipal Election Rules dated 29-3-1943, an election was held at Bhawani Mandi on 3-9-1948, of the members of the Municipal Committee of Bhawani Mandi and Bodhraj and Tribhawan Dayal were declared elected by the Returning Officer the same day. Keshari Prasad, Asabhai and Keshrimal who were unsuccessful at the election filed their objections under Rule 15, Jhalawar Municipal Election Rules in the Court of the First Class Magistrate, Bhawanimandi on 10-9-1948. The First Class Magistrate, Bhawanimandi, held certain enquiries into the matter. In the meantime on 16-2-1949, the United State of Rajasthan passed an Ordinance repealing the Jhalawar State Municipal Election Rules of 29-3-1943, and applying the U. P. Municipal Act of 1916 as amended up to U. P. Act I [1] of 1945 with certain modifications to the territories of the Rajasthan State.2. Under the Jhalawar State Municipal Rules, petitions relating to objections against elections were to be heard ...
Kishenlal and ors. Vs. Bhanwarlal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj1
Nawalkishore, C.J.1. This reference to the Full Court raises a question of considerable importance. A number of appeals are pending which according to the procedure prevailing at one time could have been disposed of by the Ijlas-i-Khas, Jodbpur but under an ordinance promulgated by His Highness the Raj Pramukh to which detailed reference will be made liter, the High Court of Rajasthan has been authorised to hear, determine and dispose them of. Accordingly on 26--1-1950, then the Constitution of India came into force, these appeals were available for disposal in the High Court. It has however, been urged on behalf of the appellant that according to Article 374(4) of the Constitution, these appeals should be transferred to and disposed of by the Supreme Court. Article 374(4) runs as follows :'On and from the commencement of this Constitution the jurisdiction of the authority functioning as the Privy Counsil in a state specified in Part B of Seh. 1 to entertain and dispose of appeals and ...
Sitaram and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj16
ORDERNawalkishore, C.J.1. This judgment will dispose of two Cri. Revns. Nos. 241 and 242 of 1950 preferred by Sitaram and Shankardan separately against the order of the learned Sessions Judge upholding their convictions and sentences.2. The complainant Jaskaran and the accused Shankardan and Sitaram all belong to village Bevta Tehsil Jodhpur. There is absolutely no evidence on the record about the state of relations between them but from what follows they must have been bad. They are related to one another but there appears to have been no love lost between them. On the evening of 3-1-1948 some performance was going to be held in the village and Jaskaran was making seating arrangements for the audience in connection with it. Whether this performance was religious or otherwise, the evidence does not show. The allegation of the prosecution is that at about 9 P. M. when Jaskaran was busy miking arrangements, the two accused, namely, Shankardan and Sitaram suddenly arrived. Shankardan was ...
Chiranji Lal Vs. Shankar Lal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj56
Sharma, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal and arises out of a suit for the recovery of Rs. 5885-12-0 from the defendant appellant and his son. The plaintiff's case was that he carries on business in the name and Style of Gulluram Shankar Lal and the defendants, who are father and son, purchased chillies worth Rs. 5804-6-3 on Fagun Section 2, St. 2003 and worth Rs. 4395-7-0 on Chet B. 11, st. 2003 from the plaintiff. In addition to this amount they borrowed rupees 68-10-0 in cash. Out of this amount, Rs. 5290 were paid on different dates and a balance of Rs. 4978-4-9 remained due from them. He, therefore, prayed for the recovery of Rs. 4978 4-9 together with Rs. 906-7-6 as interest on the said amount.2. Ram Sarup defendant did not put in an appearance and the case proceeded ex parte against him. Chiranji Lal denied the plaintiff's claim and pleaded that he made no purchase of chillies from the plaintiff's shop and was living separately from Ram Sarup, whom he had separated after paying ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›