Rajasthan Court March 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.
Mahabir Prasad Vs. Sawai Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-22-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Raj107
1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money.2. According to the allegations in the plaint, one Mst. Nanuri, widow of Govinda, executed a khata on 28-7-1941, lor Rs. 353/- in favour of Lalchand, and his son Ram Chander. Ramchnder by himself and two minors Mahavir and Prahlad, sons of Rameshwar, under the guardianship of Ramchandra, instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 480/-, which included the principal and interest on the khata executed by Nanuri, on 27-7-1944, in the Court of Civil Judge, Kotputli, against Sultan, Chandar and Bhawani as legal representatives of Mst. Nanuri.The defendants in that suit denied execution of the khata by Nanuri, and further pleaded that they were not the lega1 representatives of Nanuri or of her husband Govinda, and that the property in their possession had not come to them from Nanuri or her husband Govinda. It was also pleaded that they should not be held liable for the debt of Nanuri.The plaintiff's case then was that th...
Shantilal Vs. State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Raj7
Wanchoo, C. J.1. This is an appeal by Shantilal against the order of the District Judge, Bhilwara, dismissing the application of Shantilal under Order IX, Rule 9, C. P. C. for restoration of a suit alleged to have been dismissed for default.2. The facts, which led the appellant to apply under Order IX, Rule 9 may be briefly narrated. The appellant Shantilal had filed a suit in the court of the District Judge, Bhilwara, against the State of Rajasthan, and the Customs and Excise Commissioner. Issues were framed and thereafter dates were fixed for the plaintiff's evidence. Three times the suit was adjourned on the plaintiff's application.On one of these occasions, the plaintiff's statement was recorded. Thereafter, again, on the plaintiff's application, the suit was adjourned to the 18th of July, 1953, for further evidence of the plaintiff on payment of costs. On this date, the plaintiff did not appear. Consequently the court proceeded under Order XVII, Rule 3 C. P. C. as the plaintiff ha...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Bhanwarlal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1957
Reported in: 1957CriLJ994
Wanchoo, C.J. 1. These are two connected matters and we shall dispose them of by one judgment. The appeal is by the State against the acquittal of Nemichand by the District Magistrate, Churu. The revision is by Jaichandlal, Vice President of the Municipal Board, Bidasar against Bhanwarlal and Nemichand. 2. The facts of the case may be briefly narrated. It appears that Bhanwarlal and Nemichand had applied to the Municipal Board, Bidasar on 5th of November 1952 giving notice of constructing a house. As the application was not accompanied with the plan of the house and the Patta of the land on which the house was to be buflt, the Municipal Board gave notice to Bhanwarlal and Nemichand to submit the plan of the house and the patta of the land and thereafter grant of permission would be considered. Bhanwarlal and Nemichand were also told that they should stop making constructions without notice to the Board as they were said to have already begun the construction. 3. Bhanwarlal and Nemichan...
Tejumal Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Raj240; 1958CriLJ1241
K.L. Bapna, J. 1. This is a revision against the framing of a charge against the accused under Section 193. I. P. C.2. One Dr. Jaisingh made a police report against Laxmandass and two others on a charge under Section 332, I. P. C. and the said persons were challaned in the court of the Extra Magistrate, Tonk. The case ended in acquittal. Tejumal petitioner while appearing as a defence witness in that case made a statement on 21-7-1953 that 'Laxmandass is not related to me as a son of any of my uncles.'The Extra Magistrate, Tonk after dealing with the proceedings in which the statement was made filed a complaint to Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tonk on 4-11-1953 under Section 193 I. P. C. on the allegation that the said statement was false and the accused had intentionally given false evidence in judicial proceedings when he was legally bound on oath to state the truth.It was alleged that the said statement was false to the knowledge of the accused and he had no reason to believe it to be ...
Rijhumal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Raj17
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an application by Rijhumal under Article 226 of the Constitution against the State of Rajasthan, and the Collector of Churu praying for a writ or order prohibiting the Collector from realizing a certain sum of money from him under the Rajasthan Public Demands Recovery Act (No. 5) of 1952 (hereinafter called the Act).2. The case of the applicant was that he was an authorised ration dealer of food grains for Sujangarh town. In that connection, some criminal proceedings were started against him in 1952 with respect to wheat and Juar worth, Rs. 34,079/1/3, which, it was alleged, he had taken away in collusion with a clerk of the Supplies Department. That case was still pending against him when he received a notice in August, 1954, under Section 6 of the Act, for payment of Rs. 34,079/1/3.The applicant's contention is that the amount is not a public demand which could be recovered under the Act, and that, at any rate, no requisition of the D. S. O. or other competent...
Milakhraj Vs. Jagdish Chandra and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Raj293
Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by MiJakhraj..for a writ of quo warranto in connection with the election of the Municipal Board of Karanpur.2. The applicant is a resident of Karanpur and is a voter. The applicant's contention is that the election to the Municipal Board of Karanpur held in 1955 and in April, 1956, was illegal for the following reasons :1. The limits of the Karanpur Municipality were defined by the former Bikaner Government by notification in 1930. In September 1954, however, the Government of Rajasthan decided to alter the limits, and published a notification of its intention to do so, but no steps were taken, as required by Section 7 of the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act (No. XXIII) of 1951, to cause a copy of the notification to be posted in conspicuous places in the area affected. Consequently it was urged that the subsequent notification of December, 1954, altering the limits was not valid.2. The election was held ward...
Rao Sangramsingh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Raj310
Wanchoo, C.J.1. These are two connected applications under Article 226 of the Constitution No. 69 has been filed by Rao Sangram Singh of Deogarh, while, No. 19 has been filed by Naharsingh of Kotri. We propose to deal with these two petitions by one judgment as the point raised in them is the same.2. Briefly speaking the case of the two petitioners as it has emerged eventually is this:3. Rao Sangramsingh holds village Raila and pays Rs. 800/- a year for it to the Dargah- Khwajah Sahib, Ajmer. Naharsingh holds village Kotri, and pays Rs. 60/- per year to the same Dargah. Their case is that they were granted a permanant lease (Ijara Istamrar of Patta Istamrar) by the Dargah sometimes in the l9th century. By virtue of that Patta Naharsingh has to pay Rs. 60/- per year to the Dargah which is the Maufidar of these two villages, while Rao Sangramsingh has to pay Rs. 800/-. They have thus been holding these two villages for the Dargah for a very long time now.Their grievance is that in 1955 p...
Ram Charan Vs. Residents of Shahabad Ward Baran and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-13-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Raj248; 1958CriLJ1243
K.L. Bapna, J. 1. This is a reference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baran, dated 3-2-1956, and arises in the following circumstances: On 20-7-1955, an application for taking proceedings under Section 133 Cr. P. C. signed by several residents of Shahabad ward, Baran, was presented in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Baran, alleging that the working of the flour mill of Ram Charan was making considerable noise and the vibrations were damaging to the neighbouring buildings, & that its working caused physical discomfort, while the smoke of the engine affected the health of the public. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate sent the application to the Police Station, Baran, for report. The police supported the applicants, whereupon the Sub-Divisional Magistrate made a conditional order under Section 133 Cr. P. C. on 22nd July, 1955, directing Ramcharan to remove the flour mill or if he objected so to do, to appear before him on 16th August, 1955, to show cause against the orde...
Harnand and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-13-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Raj305; 1958CriLJ1428
K.L. Bapna, J. 1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu and arises under the following circumstances: 2. The Police Station, Chirawa filed a report under Section 133, Criminal P. C., against Hamand and eleven others with the allegation that they unlawfully obstructed the public way which led from, the town of Ojhto to Chirawa by putting up a hedge and that the said obstruction amounted to a public nuisance. The report was made to the Magistrate First Class at Chirawa who issued notices to Harnand and others. They appeared on 7-3-1956 and raised two objections. One objection was that the persons proceeded against were Panchas and could not be proceeded against without the sanction of the proper authority. The second objection was that the place where the obstruction was alleged to have been made was not a public way. The Magistrate over-ruled the first objection and in respect of second fixed 7-4-1954 for enquiry as required by Section 139 (A) of the Criminal Proc...
Bansilal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-11-1957
Reported in: [1958]33ITR176(Raj)
MODI, J. - This is a petition by Bansilal on behalf of Shri Ekling Cotton Ginning and Pressing Factory, Gangapur, under su-section (2) of section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act.The material facts are these. The assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business of ginning and pressing of cotton at Gangapur, District Bhilwara. The Income-tax Officer, Udaipur (Ward A), by his order dated the 31st July, 1953, assessed the firm to income-tax for the assessment year 1951-52, the relevant accounting period being the year ending on the 30th June, 1950. The assessee had made an application to the Income-tax Officer for registration of the firm and submitted a deed of partnership dated the 12th September, 1950, along with certain other documents executed between the partners in support of the application. The deed showed that the firm as on 12th September, 1940, consisted of nine partners including Kashiram, father of the petitioner Bansilal, and Gaurishanker and Shankerlal and six others...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »