Rajasthan Court February 1951 Judgments
Nandsingh and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Raj105
ORDERKanwarlal Bapna, J.1. This is a revn by four accused, Nandsingh, Gurudeosingh, Mt. Nihar Kaur & Mt. Nand Kaur, against their convictions & sentences.2. The Subdivisional Mag, Karanpur, convicted the first two accused under Section 324, I. P. C. & sentenced them to undergo four months' rigorous imprisonment & to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-; the latter two were convicted under Section 323 I. P. C, & sentenced to undergo one month's simple imprisonment & a fine of Rs. 50/-. On appeal, the learned Ses J., Ganganagar, maintained the conviction & sentences of accused Nandsingh & Gurudeosingh. As regards Mt. Nihal Kaur & Mt. Nand Kaur, the conviction was maintained but the sentence was reduced to payment of fine only. All the four accused have come up in revn.3. The case for the prosecution is that one Thamban Singh had a decree for recovery of money against Nandsingh & in execution thereof a warrant of attachment of a cart belonging to the Judgment-debtor was issued by the Ct of Munsif, Kara...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanwar Singh Vs. Banji and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-21-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Raj160
Bapna, J.1. This is a second appeal in a suit for malicious prosecution.2. The appellant filed an application for proceedings under Section 107, Criminal P. C. against the respondents in the court of Nazim, Sujangarh, which was dismissed, whereupon the respondents sued the appellant for damages for malicious prosecution in the sum of Rs. 250/-. The trial court held that the criminal proceedings were taken by the appellant on account of malice & without reasonable & probable cause, & decreed the suit for Rs. 100/-. On appeal the same decree was upheld.3. In this second appeal it is urged that the institution of proceedings under Section 107, Criminal P. C. do not amount to a complaint of an offence, & cannot give rise to a claim for damages for malicious prosecution. The learned counsel for the respondents has cited several cases from the Allahabad & Calcutta High Courts, which have taken the view that proceedings under Section 107 Criminal P. C. are of a quasi-criminal nature, which ma...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Nani Bai Vs. Mithulal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-19-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Raj35
ORDERBapna, J. 1. This a revision against an order of the Dist. J. of Udaipur, dated 24-4-1950.2. The petitioner, Mst. Nani Bai, sued Mithulal for ejectment from a shop & arrears of rent on the basis of a certain rent-note alleged to have been executed in favour of Gopalji Ratichand, & impleaded one Mohan Lal as deft, as the aforesaid tenant Mithulal alleged him to be the real owner & successor in title of Gopalji Ratichand. The tenant, Mithulal, set up the title of Mohan Lal as owner of the property on the basis of an alleged adoption by Nani Bai to her husband Onkarlal. Certain issues were struck by the trial Court, & it was found that the plff. was the successor in title of Gopalji Ratichand, & decreed the suit. On appeal by Mithulal & Mohan Lal, the learned Dist. J., was of opinion that certain documentary evidence filed by Mohan Lal had not been properly proved, & while holding that the appellant was not entitled to produce further evidence, directed the lower Court to examine cer...
Tag this Judgment!Sawa Vs. Kuka
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-02-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Raj66
Bapna, J.1. This is a second appeal in a suit for redemption. The pltf sued the resp for redemption of a field on the allegation that it; had been mtged for a sum of Rs. 50/- about 14 years ago but the deft was not prepared to redeem the possession after taking the amount of mtge money. The suit was instituted on 7-7-1945. The deft denied the mtge & alleged that the field had been actually sold by a dead dated the Asad Vadi 1 St. 1992 in lieu of Rs. 50/-. The trial Ct dismissed the suit & the same judgment was upheld in appeal.2. It was argued that the deed relied upon by the deft being unregistered was inadmissible in evidence & since the deft virtually admitted the pltf's prior title & the suit was not barred by limitation, the pltf should succeed even if the mtge was not proved. It was also argued that the transaction of mtge was by oral contract & the evidence led in support thereof should have been accepted by the two Cts. The learned counsel for the resp argued that whatever may ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›