Rajasthan Court July 1955 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.
Umed Singh Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1955
Reported in: 1955CriLJ1518
ORDERDave, J.1. This is a revision application by the complainant and it arises in the following circumstances:2. The petitioner filed a complaint Under Sections 147, 323 and 424, IPC against 10 persons in the Court of the Magistrate at Jetaran. After recording the complainant's evidence. 5 of the accused were charged by the Court Under Sections 323 and 424, IPC and the rest were discharged. Thereafter, the prosecution witnesses were recalled for further cross-examination by the accused. One of such witnesses was Daljitsingh, sub-inspector of Police. He was cross-examined on 18-1-1954.After his examination, it was submitted by the witness that he had attended the Court on a previous date also viz. 1-8-1952 but he could not be examined on that date as the Magistrate was not present at the headquarters and, therefore, he requested that he should be paid his expenses for that date as well. The witness .requested the Court to verify the fact of his attendance from some Vakils. Accordingly,...
Meghraj and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Raj28; (1956)IILLJ366Raj
Wanchoo, C.J.1. These are four connected applications under Article 226 o the Constitution by Meghraj (No. 22), Mukandas (No 28), Jeetmal (No. 98) and Chunnilal (No. 243). As the main points raised in them are the same, we propose to decide them by one judgment.2. Of the four applicants, Meghraj was a, male nurse in M. T. B. Hospital, Bari (Udaipur), while the other three were male nurses at the Mahatma Gandhi Hospital Jodhpur. They were dismissed on various dates in 1952. Their appeals were also dismissed in 1954. Thereafter, the present applications were filed, and the order of dismissal was challenged.3. Two main points have been, raised by the applicants in their applications. The first is that there was no rule in the Government Servants' Conduct Rules which prohibited strikes by Government servants. Therefore, even if the applicants went on strike, they could not be dismissed from service on that ground, and, in any case, the order of the Director of Medical and Health Services d...
Nand Lal and anr. Vs. Pooran and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Raj9
ORDERModi, J. 1. These are two revisions by the plaintiffs Nandlal and another against the judgments of the Civil Judge, Retangarh dated 18-12-1951, in two suits for the recovery of price of certain cloth sold. The suits were decided by the learned Judgeas email cause' court suits. As they raise identicalquestions of law going to the very root of thetrial in either case, I propose to decide, them bya single judgment. 2. The plaintiffs are dealers in cloth and carry on business at Sujangarh. The defendants were hawkers and also dealt in cloth. The plaintiffs' case was that the defendants purchased certain cloth from the former and failed to pay the price thereof. The plaintiffs, therefore, filed a suit against Puran for a sum of Rs. 200/- including a sum of Rs. 44/1/- as interest -- the rest being the price of the goods sold -- and against Chandra for a sum of Rs. 125/- out of which she price of goods sold was Rs. 97/1/3 and interest Rs. 27-14-9;The defendant in either case completely d...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›