Rajasthan Court September 1953 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.
Ramniwas Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1953
Reported in: 1954CriLJ997
ORDERNigam, J.C.1. Jamnalal was found guilty of offences under Sections 366 and 376/511, I. P. C. and was sentenced by the learned City Magistrate to rigorous imprisonment for three years on each count. He was also sentenced to five stripes under 8. 376/511, I. P. C. He preferred an appeal and the learned Sessions Judge set aside -the conviction and sentence under 3. 366, I. P. C. The conviction under Section 376/511, I. P. C. was however maintained. The sentence of whipping was set aside and the substantive sentence of imprisonment reduced to rigorous imprisonment for 1 1/2 years. Then Jamnalal came up in revision to this Court (Criminal Revision No. 112 of 1952). The relevant portion of my order, dated 9-1-1953, reads as follows:In the event, I set aside the order of the learned Sessions Judge and direct him to examine the parents of the girl and Gulab Chand under Section 428, Criminal P. C. and also to give an opportunity to the defence and the prosecution to examine the Chemical Ex...
Tilok Chand Vs. Laxmi Narayan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Raj243
Dave, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of the former Jodhpur State dated 22-11-1948. It was filed in the Ijlas-i-khas of the former Jodhpur State on 28-2-1949. After the formation of the greater Rajasthan it has come for hearing before this Court by virtue of the provisions of the Rajasthan Appeals and Petitions (Discontinuance) Ordinances (No. 40 of 1949 and No. 12 of 1950).2. In order to appreciate the facts of this case, it would be proper to give a pedigree table showing relationship of the plaintiff-appellant with some of the respondents. SARUP CHAND ______________________|______________________ | | Dhan Raj Khub Chand | | Tilokchand Mulchand (Plaintiff. Appellant) (Defdt.-Respdt. No.5) | Ganeshmal (Defdt.-Respdt. No. 6)The parties in this case are residents of Ladnun. The respondents 5 and 6, Mulchand and Ganeshmal, executed a sale-deed on 3-4-1944 in respect of a 'nohra' situated in the same village in favour of the defendant-respondents Laxminara...
Jawanmal Vs. Kantilal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Raj246
Dave, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 115, Civil P. C., against the order of the Civil Judge, Sirohi, dated 23-8-1952.2. The facts giving rise to it are that the petitioner Jawanmal brought a suit against seven defendants for dissolution of partnership and rendition of accounts. Defendant 3 Lalchand was described as a minor and his eldest brother Kantilal, defendant 1, was shown as his guardian in the plaint. The trial Court passed a preliminary decree on 12-1-1952 against the defendants declaring that partnership had come to an end on Kartik Vadi 15, Smt. 2003, Proportionate shares of the parties in the partnership were also declared and it was ordered that accounts be taken. The suit was adjourned for making a final decree to 15-2-1952.3. On 4-4-1952 defendant 3 Lalchand moved an application saying that the plaintiff had sued him as a minor and given his age as 12 years but this was incorrect and that he was a major on the date of the institution of the suit. Ac...
Sukhlal and ors. Vs. Deepchand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Raj58
Modi, J.1. This is a defendants' certificate appeal against a judgment and decree of the High Court of the former State of Jodhpur, dated 5-1-1949, and was originally filed before the Ijlas-i-Khas of the same State and has come to us for disposal on the integration of that State with the State of Rajasthan.2. The material facts may shortly be stated as follows. The plaintiff-respondents carried on the business of commission agents under the name and style of Ratanlal Simrathmal at Bombay. The defendant-appellants are members of a joint Hindu family, defendant-appellant No. 1 Sukhlal being the father and Nos. 2 and 3, Ranulal and Misrilal, his sons. The plaintiff-respondents' case was that under instructions from defendant-appellant Sukhlal, they entered into certain transaction's relating to the sale and purchase of gold, silver, groundnuts, linseeds, cotton and wheat, for and on behalf of the appellants in Smt. 1990 and 1991 as a result of which the plaintiffs were entitled to receive...
Chunia Vs. Revenue Board and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Raj236
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by Chunia for issue of a writ, presumably a certiorari, quashing the order of the Board of Revenue, dated 29-12-1952, by which that Court dismissed the appeal of the applicant.2. The facts, which have led to the present application, are these. A suit was brought by Deva, opposite party, against the applicant and his father Dalchand. It was originally filed in the Court of Munsif of Bhilwara in 1947. It was transferred under Section 6(3) of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act, 1951, to the Court of S. D. O. Bhilwara. That Court decreed the suit on 29-3-1952. There was an appeal by the present applicant to the Additional Commissioner, which was dismissed. Then followed a second appeal to the Board of Revenue, which was also dismissed on 29-12-1952. Thereafter, the present application was made in this Court on 15-1-1953.3. Three points are urged on behalf of the applicant in support of t...
Umraomal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-10-1953
Reported in: 1955CriLJ95
Bapna, J.(1) These are 14 petitions Under Section 491, Criminal P. C. and Article 226, Constitution of India.(2) Petitions Nos. 100 to 107 were presented in this Court on 2-9-1953 and petitions Nos. 108 to 113 on 5-9-1953. All these petitions involve similar questions of law and fact and are therefore dealt with by one judgment. The detenus were arrested under the orders of the District Magistrate, Jaipur, dated 31-8-1953, purporting to act under Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 3, Preventive Detention Act of 1950. The orders in all the cases are similar and were as follows:No. - Dated 31-8-1953.Whereas, I Ramniwas Hawa, District Magistrate, Jaipur, am satisfied that (name and description of detenu) is indulging in activities highly prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and tranquillity and whereas with a view to prevent him from acting in such a manner, it is considered essential to detain, him;I, in exercise of the powers conferred on me by Clause (1) of Sub-section ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›