Rajasthan Court August 1960 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.
Tikam Chand Vs. Laxmichand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Raj87
ORDERJagat Narayan, J.1. This is a revision application by adefendant in a suit for recovery of money on thebasis of two Sah Jog Hundis against an order of thetrial court holding that they were payable on demandand as such were exempt from payment of stampduty.2. The Hundis are payable after a particular date specified therein. The contention of the applicant is that they are payable otherwise than on demand within the meaning of Article 13 of the Schedule to the Stamp Act. On behalf of the respondents it is argued that the mere fact that the Hundis are made payable after a particular date does not make them payable otherwise than on demand as after that date they are payable on demand. Reliance is placed on Partab Chand Ratan Chand v. Gilbert, AIR 1934 All 695 (1). That was a case of a post dated cheque which was only payable after a certain date.The question for determination was whether it was a cheque within the meaning of Section 6 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which defines i...
Pangir Bajgir GosaIn Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-05-1960
Reported in: 1962CriLJ91
J.S. Ranawat, J.1. This case was referred to a Division Bench by one of us sitting singly. The facts of the case have been given in the order of reference and we need not repeat them over again.2. The accused Pangir was convicted by the court f the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Nohar on the 31st of January, 1958 under Sections 353 and 225B I.P.C His convictions were confirmed on appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ganganagar on the 13th of March, 1958. It was held by both the courts that the accused Pangir obstructed Ganpat Singh. Head Constable of Police while the latter was taking Mst. Lichhma with him after having arrested her in pursuance of a warrant issued by the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Nohar and he rescued her from the custody of Ganpat Singh. It was also held that he used criminal force and assaulted the Police officer while lie was performing his duty.In this appeal, it is contended that the warrant issued by the magistrate was illegal inasmuch as it did not bear the se...
Mohanlal Vs. Vijai NaraIn and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Raj136
I.N. Modi, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal in a suit for ejectment which has been decreed by both courts below.2. The material facts arc short and simple. The plaintiffs purchased the suit shop along with two others by a sale-deed dated the 17th July, 1956, Ex. 3, from Mazhar Ali and Khurshed Alam who were the previous owners thereof. The defendant is a tenant in the suit shop. It is common ground between the parties that the rent payable by him was Rs. 4/- per mensem. The plaintiffs' case was that they required the suit shop (in addition to the two other shops which they had purchased from Muzar Ali and Khurshed AH) for purposes of their own bona fide residence and so they gave a notice (Ex. A-1) to the defendant on the 24th January, 1957, asking him to vacate the shop by the 16th February, 1957.The plaintiffs thought that the tenancy between the defendant and the plaintiffs commenced on the 17th July, 1956, and consequently they gave the notice to the defendant to vacate the...
S.C. Bahl and anr. Vs. Magh Raj and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-01-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Raj39
ORDERJagat Narayan, J. 1. This is a revision application by the Income Tax Officer, Jodhpur, against an order dated 26th March 1957 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Jodhpur, in a suit for the recovery of money pending before him. 2. The suit has been instituted by an advocate for recovering his fees for appearing before the Income Tax Officer on behalf of certain assessees. In order to prove that he was engaged by them and actually appeared for them before the Income Tax Officer the plaintiff applied to the court for summoning the Income Tax Officer, Jodhpur for producing the following documents : (1) Vakalatnama filed by the plaintiff on behalf of his clients before the Income Tax Officer, Jodhpur. (2) Order-sheet of proceedings before the Income Tax Officer showing the appearance of the plaintiff on behalf of his clients on different dates, and (3) An application filed by the plaintiff before the I. T. O. on behalf of his clients. 3. Summonses were duly issued by the court. Th...
S. C. Bahl and Another Vs. Magh Raj and Another.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-01-1960
Reported in: [1961]42ITR308(Raj)
JAGAT NARAYAN, J. - This is a revision application by the Income-tax Officer, Jodhpur, against an order dated March 26, 1957, passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Jodhpur, in a suit for the recovery of money pending before him.The suit has been instituted by an advocate for recovering his fees for appearing before the Income-tax Officer on behalf of certain assessees. In order to prove that he was engaged by them and actually appeared for them before the Income-tax Officer the plaintiff applied to the court for summoning the Income-tax officer, Jodhpur, for producing the following documents :(1) vakalatnama filed by the plaintiff on behalf of his clients before the Income-tax Officer, Jodhpur,(2) order sheet of proceedings before the Income-tax Officer showing the appearance of the plaintiff on behalf of his clients of different dates, and(3) an application filed by the plaintiff before the Income-tax Officer, on behalf on his clients.Summonses were duly issued by the court. the Incom...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›