Rajasthan Court October 1952 Judgments
The State Vs. Magga and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-27-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj105
Wanchoo, C.J. 1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Pali for confirmation of the sentence of death passed under Section 302, Penal Code on Bhagga and Magga. There has been no appeal however by Bhagga and Magga and the reference is, therefore, to be disposed of in the manner provided under Section 376, Criminal P. C.2. The case relates to an incident which took place on the night between the 3 and 4-4-1951. There is a well known as Imaratia in village Gadhwara. The lands attached to that well were cultivated by eight persons in 1950-1951. These were Bhika, Parbhoo, Gheesa deceased, Ganesh deceased, Ratna, Chala, Kanji and the two accused Bhagga and Magga who are brothers. When the crop was ripe for cutting at the end of March, 1951, there was some dispute in that connection. Three labourers were engaged to help the partners in cutting the crop; but after their engagement the accused objected to the employment oflabourers on 3-4-1951. In that connection there was exchange of ab...
Tag this Judgment!Atmaram Vs. Madanlal Rathi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-27-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj123
Wanchoo, C.J. 1. This Is an application by Atmaram under Article 226, Constitution of India for issue of a writ of certiorari or mandamus against the Additional Commissioner Udaipur, and the Rent Controller, Udaipur.2. The case of the applicant is that he took a shop on lease from Shyamlal who has also been made a party to his application. Shyamlal made an application under the (former) United State of Rajasthan Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Ordinance No. 22 of 1948 before the Rent Controller, Udaipur, on 9th December 1950. That application was decided on 28th September 1951, by which date the Rajasthan Premises Control of Rent and Eviction Act (17 of 1950) had come into force. The applicant filed an appeal before the Commissioner, as provided in the (former) United State of Rajasthan Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Ordinance (No. 22) of 1948. He also took the precaution of filing an appeal before the District Magistrate under Section 22 of Act 17 of 1950. The appeal before the...
Tag this Judgment!Dholpur Co-operative Transport and Multipurposes Union Ltd. Vs. the Ap ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-27-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj193
Sharma, J.1. These are two petitions, one No. 275 of 1952, by the Dholpur-Co-operative Transport and Multipurposes Union Ltd. (to be hereinafter referred to as the Union), and the other No. 276 of 1952 by the Dholpur Motor Transport Association (to be hereinafter referred to as the association), under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Both are directed, inter alia, against the Appellate Authority (Transport) Rajasthan, the State Transport Authority Raja-sthan, and the Regional Transport Authority Jaipur Region, In Petition No. 275 Satya Narayan Singh and in petition No. 276 Choudhary Khazan Singh have also been made opposite parties. The facts, so far as they are necessary for the disposal of these two petitions, are that applications for stage carriage permits were invited inter alia, on the Dholpur-Agra route, vide notification dated 28-6-1951, of the Office of the Transport Commissioner, Rajasthan, Jaipur published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated 7-7-1951. The applications we...
Tag this Judgment!Bansidhar Vs. Pribhu Dayal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-22-1952
Reported in: AIR1954Raj1
Dave, J. 1. This case comes today for determination of the appellant's application under Order 41, Rule 5, Civil P. C. The respondent had filed a suit against the appellant in the Court of the Civil Judge, Alwar for Rs. 3437/8/- on account of the loss sustained by him for alleged breach of contract committed by the appellant in refusing to take delivery of the goods. The trial Court dismissed the suit but on the plaintiff's appeal to the District Judge, Alwar, a decree for Rs. 2750/- with proportionate cost in both the Courts has been given in his favour. The defendant has, therefore, come here in second appeal and presented a petition for staying the execution of the decree pending the decision of this appeal. On 29-8-1952, notice was issued to the opposite party to show cause why the stay application be not allowed, and an ad interim order to stay the execution was passed on that date. The appellant's learned advocate wants the order to be made absolute while the respondent's learned...
Tag this Judgment!Madanlal Kapur Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-22-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj162
Ranawat, J.1. These are two applications by Madanlal Kapur under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, one of them is directed against the District Magistrate of Kotah and others, and the other against the District Magistrate of Jaipur.2. The facts leading to both these applications are to a very large extent similar and this is why we are disposing them together by one judgment.3. In Writ application No. 50 of 1952 the petitioner has also impleaded along with the District Magistrate of Kotah the State of Rajasthan and the Superintendent of Police, Kotah, as theopposite parties. In the other application, he has however contended himself by impleading the District Magistrate of Jaipur only. His case in petition No. 50 is that he wanted to run a variety show and to organise certain games along with it at Kotah for profit, to which the public was to be allowed access. He commenced the show on the 21st of April 1952 at Kotah under the name of Jai Hind Variety Show and two items of his ...
Tag this Judgment!inder Nath Modi Vs. Nandram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj59
Bapna, J.1. This is a first appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of possession.2. One Nandram and his brother Achlu mortgaged two houses mentioned as A and B in the schedule annexed to the plaint, with one Jainarain for a sum of Rs. 3000/- on 'Be-sakh Vadi' 7, Smt. 1975 (22nd April 1919) and delivered possession thereof to the mortgagee in pursuance of the mortgage. Nandram took a lease of the house A from the mortgagee on the date of the mortgage and occupied the same as a tenant. On the failure of Nandram to pay rent, Jainarain sued for arrears of rent and ejectment and obtained a decree on the 12th of September 1929, and actual physical possession was delivered to him in execution of the decree on 19th of November 1931,It was alleged that Mst. Sarupi, mother of Nandram, committed trespass over the said house and dispossessed the mortgagee. Thereafter, Jai Narain filed a complaint for house-trespass but Mst. Sarupi was acquitted on the ground that her action was in exercise...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Gajraj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-06-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj66
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of Gajraj accused by the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Jodhpur.2. The case relates to an incident which took place on the night between the 24th and 25th May, 1948. The prosecution story was briefly this:3. Mst. Patasi is the wife of one Chhela. On the night in question, Chhela had gone out, and she was alone in her house in village Bala. She was sleeping when at about 10 P. M. or so, somebody touched her feet. She woke up and asked who he was, and the man replied that he was Gajraj. Thereafter, Gajraj wanted to have sexual intercourse with her; but she was not willing. On her refusal to submit to his wishes, Gajraj slapped her first, and when she raised an alarm picked up a Basola, which was lying nearby and hit her with it. As it was not very late, some people were awake, and were sitting at the Hatai which is an open place in the midst of the village. These persons were Manrupa, Ruggha P. W., Chautha P. W., and one ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›