Rajasthan Court December 1957 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.
Badri Lal Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-05-1957
Reported in: AIR1960Raj184; 1960CriLJ1000
K.L. Bapna, J.1. This case has been referred to the Division Bench by a learned Single Judge of this Court.2. One Badrilal is being prosecuted for offences under Sections 409 and 420 I. P. C. in the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bundi. On 27th December, 1956 the Public Prosecutor requested for directing the accused to give his specimen handwriting. An objection was raised on behalf of the accused. The learned Magistrate after referring to the Supreme Court decision in M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, AIR 1954 SC 300 relied on the case of Sailendra Nath Sinha v. the State, AIR 1955 Cal 247, that the obtaining of a specimen handwriting under Section 73 of the Evidence Act did not amount to violation of Article 20(3) of the Constitution.The accused filed a revision, and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bundi has recommended that the order of the Magistrate be set aside as it amounted to violation of Article 20(3) of the Constitution. The case came for hearing before the lea...
Kedarnath and anr. Vs. Brahmanand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-04-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Raj37
K.K. Sharma, J. 1. These are two appeals by the plaintiffs, one by Kedarnath plaintiff and the other by Kanhiya Lal plaintiff against the appellate judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Jaipur District.2. These two plaintiffs filed two separate suits and a third suit of similar nature was brought by one Rameshwar. In all the three suits Brahma-nand respondent was the sole defendant and they were for the recovery of damages for malicious prosecution and were brought in consequence of the acquittal of the plaintiffs by the Court of Sessions, Jaipur District in a case under Sections 454 and 380 of the Jaipur Penal Code.The criminal proceedings were started on the report of the defendant respondent Brahmanandwho alleged that in his absence the plaintiffs along with a few others had broken open the lock of the shop in the tenancy of the defendant and had taken away certain movable property without his consent which had been locked up inside the shop by the defendant. The plaini...
Jaidayal and ors. Vs. Umrao Harchand Ahir and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-02-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Raj199
K.L. Bapna, J.1. These two appeals arise in a suit for declaration which was subsequently amended so as to become a suit for possession.2. One Gordhan Ahir resident of Nihalpur Behror, made a gift of his property to his daughter's son Umrao resident of Gugadia, Tehsil Behror by document of 4-2-1954. The gift related to the movable and immovable property & included house property as well as agricultural land. The document was duly registered and in respect of the agricultural land mutation in the name of the donee was effected on 10-1-1946 by transfer No. 48.The plaintiffs who were collaterals of Gordhan instituted a suit out of which these two appeals have arisen on 28-12-1947 in the Court of the Munsif, Behror for a declaration that the said deed of gift was invalid as it was contrary to the custom of the village. It was alleged that a transfer whether by way of sale mortgage or gift could only be made in favour of the collaterals. Gordhan died during the pendency of the suit and a pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›