Rajasthan Court February 1958 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.
Durga Prasad Chowdhary Vs. Mukat Behari Lal Bhargava and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Raj16
Bapna J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. 2. The petitioner Durga Prasad filed an election petition on 24th April, 1957, under Section 81 of the Represenation of the People Act (No. XL1I1 of 196l, hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) with the prayer that the election of respondent No. 1, Shri Mukat Beharilal Bhargava,from the Ajmer Parliamentary Constituency in the General Election held in the months of February, March 1957, be set aside, and he may be further disqualified along with respondent No. 2, Mr. B.N. Bhargava, to stand for election for a period of six years, and it may also be declared that the respondents have committed corrupt practices. The allegations in the petition were contested by the respondents, and one of the objections raised was that Seth Sobhag Mal Lodha was a necessary party under Section 82(b) of the Act, but he was not made a party. It was prayed that the petition should be dismissed under Section 90(...
Bhanwarlal Vs. the Appellate Tribunal of the State Transport Authority ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Raj176
I.N. Modi, J.1. This is a writ application by Bhanwarlal under Articles 226 and 227 ot the Constitution and arises Mnder the following circumstances.2. The petitioner was granted a temporary permit for plying a stage carriage on the Pokaran Phalsoond route via Ujlan Bhaniyana by the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur, on 25-9-1957. Accordingly the petitioner put one bus on the route on 19-11-1957. Opposite party No. 3 Laxminarain Gandhi is the holder of one stage carriage permit on this very route. He opposed the grant of the temporary permit in question to the petitioner but the Regional Transport Authority overruled the objection and granted the permit. It appears from the resolution of the Regional Transport Authority dated 25, 26, and 27-9-1957, that the said authority had been of the opinion that the Pokaran Phalsoond route and the Phalsoond-Shergarh route should be amalgamated into one and permits may be granted for the extended route from Pokaran to Shergarh and to that end i...
Brijvallabh Vs. A.R. Khan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Raj293; 1958CriLJ1348
K.N. Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is an application for contempt of court by 'Brijvallabh against Shri Abdul Rashid Khan, Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment, Government of India, Jaipur.2. The facts of the case are not in dispute. It appears that one Sub-Inspector Lalchand is working under the opposite party. The applicant filed a complaint under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code against Sub-Inspector Lalchand in the court of Magistrate First Class, Kanod. Summons was issued by that court for the appearance of Sub-Inspector Lalchand and the date fixed was 21-11-1957.The summons was sent in accordance with section 72 (i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the opposite party for service on his subordinate. The opposite party returned the summons unserved on the ground mat Sub-Inspector Lalchand was busy with investigation of some important case and, therefore, service could not be effected on him on account of his preoccupation. It was also requested that some other date...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi and Rajasthan, New Delhi Vs. Champal ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Raj232
K.N. Wanchoo, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called the Act) by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The question, which has been referred to this Court for opinion, is this:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the asscssec was entitled to set off the loss of Rs. 13,588/- which accrued or arose to the assessee at its Gulabpura shop in Rajasthan, an Indian State against its business income accruing or arising in British India under any of the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act?'2. The facts which have been stated by the Appellate Tribunal are these. The assessment year under consideration is 1949-50. The assesses is a Hindu undivided family resident in Beawar in the former State of Ajmer and derives income from property, managing agency commission, Edward Mills, and dividends and also carries on business at Kekri, Bijainagar, Gulabpura, Jainagar, Bombay and Hansi. The assessee's head-office is at Beawar. Durin...
Makhan Lal Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Raj214; 1959CriLJ1115
K.K. Sharma, J.1. This is an appeal by Makhan Lal, who has been convicted by the learned Special Judge, Jhalawar, under Section 161 I.P.C. and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). Under Section 161, I.P.C. he has been sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and under Section 5(2) of the Act, he has been sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to further rigorous imprisonment for three months.Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment have been made concurrent. This judgment of the learned Special Judge is dated the 25th of May 1957.2. The appellant was the Station Master and posted at Jhalawar Road Railway Station of the Western Railway since the 1st of January 1954. The case of the prosecution is that he was in the habit of demanding bribe both from those who consigned the goods from Jhalawar Railway Station or whose goods were received at the said station. One Bhanwerlal Da...
Chhogalal and ors. Vs. Kanayalal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Raj303
K.N. Wanchoo, C.J. 1. This is an appeal by Chhogalal and two others against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Udaipur, by which he dismissed the suit brought by the plaintiffs-appellants against Nen-chand, now dead, and two others. 2. The case of the plaintiffs was briefly this. The defendants were the owners of a joint Hindu family firm Shivlal Nenchand, which had a branch in Charbhuja Road. The plaintiffs were the owners of another joint Hindu family firm known as Chhogalal Sohanlal of which Chhogalal was the Karta. There were dealings between the two firms and in that connection the defendants gave an account signed by them on Sawan Sudi 10 Section 2005. In that account the defendants showed that a sum of Rs. 9,900/- was due from them to the plaintiffs. This account bore the signature of Kanhaiyalal, defendant No. 2 and the plaintiffs the suit on thebasis of this account and claimed interest at 6 per cent per annum, thus claiming in all Rs. 11,397. 3. The suit was r...
Ramdas and ors. Vs. Raja and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-25-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Raj257
I.N. Modi, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff Ramdas and others in a suit for damages for defamation. 2. The plaintiff was the Pujari of Shri Raghu-nathji's temple in village Sanwatra at all material times. The defendants arc residents of that village. The plaintiff's case was that the defendants made an application on Posh Vadi 11 Smt. 1998 to the Mehkma Khas of the State of Mewar, as it then was, and later during the course of an enquiry emanating from that application gave statements before the Assistant Settlement Officer on 3-5-1945, in which they stated that the plaintiff was not a man of good character, that he did not perform the worship of the temple regularly or properly, that when he was being asked to perform the worship properly he assumed an attitude of aggression and behaved violently, that he had blocked the way to the temple and that he also beat the 'gwalas', both women and men, when they brought firewood from the jungle, and, therefore, he was not fit to ...
Surajmal Vs. Bheroolal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-21-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Raj311
I.N. Modi, J. 1. The appellant Surajmal and the respondents Bheroolal and Gokalchand are rival pre-emptors and obtained a joint decree in a suit for pre-emption by which the right of the appellant to pre-empt was adjudged superior to that of Bheroolal and Gokalchand. By this decree which is dated 5-5-1945, the trial Court (Hakim of Sambhar) declared that Surajmal appellant do pay a sum of Rs. 850/- in Court by or before 15-6-1945, whereupon he would be entitled to receive possession of Dhularam's house from defendants Nos. 1 to 5 (Ganeshilal and others, vendees).It was further provided by the decree that if Surajmal fails to deposit the amount, (apparently meaning thereby, by or before 15-6-1945) then the decree passed in his favour shall stand cancelled. In that event it was further provided that if Gokalchand etc. should deposit the sum of Rs. 850/-before 15-7-1945, in Court, they would be entitled to obtain possession of the house. Certain other directions as regards costs were also...
Nathulal Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-20-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Raj153
Jagat Narayan, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by one Nathulal, who was formerly judicial clerk in the court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Begun, against an order of the District Magistrate and Collector, Chittorgarh, dated 8-9-1955, dismissing him from service. The application has been opposed on behalf of the State. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. We are satisfied that the application must be allowed.2. One Durjansingh complained to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Begun, alleging that Shri Nathulal, the then judicial clerk had obtained from Jairam, Bhura, Deva and Lalsingh a sum of Rs. 400/-, as illegal gratification. They were accused persons in a dacoity case pending in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. On receiving this complaint the Sub-Divisional Magistrate held an enquiry and reported to the Collector that sufficient evidence for prosecuting Nathulal was not available.The Collector there...
Ramnath Vs. Dwarka Prasad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Raj201
K.N. Wanchoo, C.J. 1. This Full Bench has been constituted to resolve a conflict which has arisen between two decisions ofthis Court both by Division Benches. The first decision was given on 1-10-1956 in Kishorilal v. Indersingh Mehta, (Civil Writ Petition No. 191 of 1956) decided at Jaipur. It was held there that an election petition under Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Election Rules, 1954, (hereinafter called the Rules) could be filed even before the election was notified under Rule 18 (c) read with Section 14 o the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, No. XXI of 1953 (hereinafter called the Act). The second decision was given on the 11th of October, 1957 at Jodhpur in Civil Writ patition No. 114 of 1956 Mangilal v. The Collector of Bhilwara, (AIR 1958 Raj 84). As the first decision was not marked 'Reportable', it was not known in Jodhpur when the second decision was given. The question, which falls for consideration, may be formulated as follows :Can an election petition under Rule 19 of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »