Rajasthan Court December 1950 Judgments
Dwarka Prasad Vs. Gopi Nath and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-19-1950
Reported in: AIR1952Raj69
Sharma, J.1. This is one of the defendants appeal and arises out of a suit for redemption, filed by the plaintiff respondents against the defendant appellants in the Court of the Munsiff, Bharatpur.2. It was alleged that certain shops in the town of Bharatpur were mortgaged by Shankerlal, father of the plaintiff No. 1, Gopi Nath, plaintiff No. 2 Bal Kishen, and grandfather of Prem Narain minor, plaintiff No. 3, on the 28th of June 1910 for a consideration of Rs. 500/- in favour of the defendants Chhoteylal, Nand Kumar, Badri Prasad & Dwarka Prasad. The rate of interest agreed upon was Rs. 1/4/- per cent, per mensem. It was recited in the mortgage deed that the rent of the mortgaged property at the time of the mortgage was Rs. 5/- per mensem. This rent would be credited towards interest. If the rent realized in future exceeded the amount of monthly interest, the excess would be credited towards principal.3. The plaintiffs alleged that Rs. 300/- were paid towards the mortgage money and t...
Tag this Judgment!Lala and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-15-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj61
Nawalkishore, C.J.1. On 29-4-1948, Lala, Kasamdin, Nagarmal, Ibrahim, Munir, Mohammad and Chhotusingh, in all seven persons, were challaned under Rule 81, Defence of India Rules, in force in the former State of Bikaner, in the Ct. of Mag. 1st Class Rajgarh, on the ground that they were attempting to smuggle fourteen bags of rice on seven camels out of the State to Shekhawati on the night between the 1 & 2-3-1947. All these persons were convicted by the learned Mag. on 12-7-1948, & sentenced to a fine of Rs. 400 each. The camels belonging to them & the bags of rice seized from their possession were confiscated. An appeal was filed in the Ct. of the learned Ses. J. Churu, but was dismissed on 20-4-1949. Thereafter, only four persons, namely, Ibrahim, Munir, Mohammad & Chhotusingh moved the H. C. in revision with the result that on 18-11-1949 the order convicting & sentencing them was set aside on the principal ground that the charge as framed by the Mag. was defective as specific particu...
Tag this Judgment!Suraj Karan and ors. Vs. Sitaram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1950
Reported in: AIR1952Raj31
Gupta, J. 1. The first appeal on behalf of the plaintiffs arises out of a suit filed by them against the respondents in the Court of the District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, on the 29th of April, 1947, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 20,531/-. 2. The main question that has been raised in this appeal before us relates to the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts in Marwar and it is to be determined whether or not did the defendants actually and voluntarily reside in Mundwa, Marwar at the commencement of the suit so as to give the Courts in Marwar jurisdiction to entertain the suit. We have , therefore, to examine the pleadings of the patties and the evidence produced by them in this respect. The plaintiffs have stated it in their plaint that they themselves carried on the business of commission agents in Bombay in the name and style of Ramratan Sheo Bux and had a shop of the same name in Mundwa (Marwar) also, while the defendants who were real brothers, carried on their business in Nizamabad, Hyd...
Tag this Judgment!Kishore Singh Vs. Paharh Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj55
Bapna, J.1. This is a petition for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of the High Court of Rajasthan dated 14-8-1950, The leave is claimed as a matter of right under exception to Clause (a) of Rule 17, Ijlas-i-khas, Rules, 1939.2. Under the said provision, a decision of the High Court of the covenanting State of Jodhpur was open to appeal if the case related to land and either party pleaded that he held the laud in dispute otherwise than as a cultivating tenant of the opposite parts, and an issue was raised in the case regarding the tenure in which the land was held. It is conceded that the case is not appealable and no leave can he granted if the case fell within Article 133 of the Constitution, and the petition is pressed solely on the aforesaid Ijlas-i-Khas Rules. The Ijlas-i-Khas Rules of 1939 were repealed by the Ijlas-i-Khas Rules of 1946 where it was further provided that even in the cases provided by the exception in Rules of 1939, the appeal must involve...
Tag this Judgment!Harji Jogaram Vs. Hasti Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-07-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Raj82
ORDERBharadwaj, J.1. This is an application by the defte., in a suit pending in the Court of the Munsif City at Jodhpur, for revising the order of the learned Munsif, by which he placed the burden of an issue on the defts. The suit was brought against them by the non-applicant Hasti Mal for the recovery of Rs. 1076.7 on the basis of a document alleged to have been executed by the defts. on 1-2-1948 in favour of the pltf. The defts. denied the execution, as well as the receipt of the consideration, but made an allegation in their written statement that on 16-12-1947 one Madan Singh, the brother of pltf., under pretence of giving contracts for preparing sofas, obtained their signatures on two blank papers and that they believe that the 'chitthi' in suit was forged on one of these two blank papers. On 10-4-1950, the learned Munsif framed the necessary issues in the case, and placed the burden of proving the execution of the 'chitti' on the pltf. On 2-5-1950, an application was presented b...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›