Rajasthan Court July 1952 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.
Kishoresingh Vs. Revenue Board, Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj37
Wanchoo, C.J. 1. This is an application by Kishore Singh under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of prohibition or certiorari against the Board of Revenue of Rajasthan, and has arisen in the following circumstances :2. The applicant filed a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment in the court of the Assistant Revenue Officer, Jodhpur, in November, 1944. This suit was decreed in May, 1948. Thereupon, there was an appeal by Sitaram, opposite party, who was defendant in the suit. That appeal was dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner, Jodhpur, on the 18th March, 1949. Then followed a second appeal by Sitarani to the Board of Revenue of the former Covenanting State of Jodhpur. This appeal was filed on the 9th July, 1949. Thereafter the Board of Revenue of the State of Rajasthan was created by Ordinance No. XXII of 1949. Section 19 of that Ordinance, which will require interpretation in this case, reads as follows:'On the coming into force of this Ordinance all Board...
Ajit Singh and anr. Vs. Yamuna Devi and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj121
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an appeal by Ajit Singh and Abhaya Singh against the order of the Additional District Judge of Jaipur. This order has been passed in a pending suit for partition brought by Yamuna Devi, plaintiff-respondent, against the appellants and their brother Amar Singh. The plaintiff-respondent claims that she is entitled to half the property, while the other half belongs to the three brothers, and wants her share to be partitioned by metes and bounds. During the pendency of the suit a receiver was appointed by the Court with the consent of all the parties in April, 1951, The receiver realised Rs. 10,000/- from the Public Works Department. Thereafter the parties applied to the Court that the receiver may be directed to pay them certain amounts by way of subsistence allowance. The Additional District Judge, by his order under appeal, directed the receiver to keep Rs. 5,000/- in reserve, and to pay Rs. 2,500/- to the plaintiff-respondent and Rs. 2,500/- to the defendants-ap...
Bhairon Lal Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj131
Wanchoo, C.J. 1. This is an appeal by Bhairon Lal against his conviction under Section 302, I. P. C., by the Sessions Judge of Jhalawar.2. The prosecution story was briefly this. The deceased Panna was the husband of Mst. Bhonri, P. W. 9. It appears that for some time past illicit intimacy had sprung up between the accused and Mst. Bhonri. We find that Mst. Bhonri was at her father's house in April 1949. Panna went to fetch her on Sunday, 3rd April, 1949. On Monday 4th April 1949, they were both returning from Mst. Bhonri's father's house. It further appears that Bhairon appellant was also at Mst. Bhonri's father's house on that day, though he left the place a few hours before Parma deceased and Mst. Bhonri. It may be mentioned that the mother of Bhairon accused is now the wife of Mst. Bhonri's father, and that is how the accused used to go there. The evidence of Mst. Bhonri is that she and her husband reached a place called Richwa-ka-Barda on 4th April after sunset. The appellant was ...
Pyarchand and ors. Vs. Dungar Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj90
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is a revision by Pyarchand and others and has arisen in the following circumstances:2. Dungarsingh, opposite party, filed a suit against Pyarchand and others in October 1944 praying that a certain arbitration award dated 20-4-1944, may bo ordered to be filed and a decree passed in accordance with it. The parties are descended from a common ancestor, Dungarsingh belonging to one branch and the applicants Pyarchand and others belonging to another. There were disputes between the parties about partition of their ancestral property and litigation was going on. In one such litigation, there was a revision to the High Court of the former State of Mewar. In the course of the proceedings in the High Court, parties appointed one Tejsingh Kothari as arbitrator to arbitrate ail disputes between them which were on that date pending in courts. It was also provided that those disputes between the parties which were not then pending in Courts would also be decided by this arbitra...
Laloo Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-17-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj214
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an appeal by Laloo against his conviction under Section 302, Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge-of Banswara.2. The prosecution case relates to the murder of one Chandu. This man was in the service of Saligram of village Khandu. It appears that, on the night between 24 and 25-12-1950, Chandu deceased, and Narain, brother of Saligram, were keeping watch over a field of theirs. At about 3 or 4 A. M., Narain came away leaving Chandu still sleeping in the field. The same afternoon at about 2.30 P. M., the body of Chandu was found lying dead in that very field. It appears that he had been injured with a sword, and a number of blows had been given on his neck and other parts of his body. Information was sent to the police, and investigation began soon after.3. The appellant Laloo was arrested on the evening of 26-12-1950. Before that a sword had been found lying where the dead body of Chandu was in the field, while the sheath of the sword was also found at som...
Ramdayal Vs. Ram Narayan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-14-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Raj125
Bapna, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the defendant in a suit for recovery of rent and ejectment.2. The case for the plaintiff-respondent is that the defendant rented certain premises mentioned in para (1) of the plaint from the plaintiff at a rent of Rs. 8/- per mensem bya deed dated Poh Sudi 1, Smt. 2002. Thereafter the plaintiff wanted to build a second storey and it was alleged that the defendant agreed to vacate the premises, or to pay Rs. IV- for the upper storey and Rs. 8/- for the lower storey as rent per mensem. It was alleged that after the upper storey was built the defendant took possession of it without permission of the plaintiff but did, not pay Rs. 23/- as agreed upon and also refused to vacate the premises. A notice was served but to no effect. The plaintiff claimed Rs. 31/8/-by way of rent in arrears and prayed for ejectment of the defendant on the ground that it was required for his 'bona fide' personal necessity.3. The defendant admitted the tenancy but pleaded th...
Mahant Prem Dass and ors. Vs. the Ajmer Municipality
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-04-1952
Reported in: 1954CriLJ544
ORDERAtma Charan, J.C.1. Heard the parties. The legality of the house-tax imposed by the Ajmer Municipality may more appropriately be challenged, if so advised, before the Civil Court by bringing a proper suit. In a summary proceeding for recovery of the arrears of water-tax Under Section 234 under the Regulation, it was not for the court below to have analysed whether such tax could or could not have been appropriately levied by the Ajmer Municipality.2. The application in revision is accordingly dismissed....
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›