Rajasthan Court April 1962 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.
Sohan Lal Vs. Rajmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Raj4
Jagat Narayan, J.1. This is an execution second appeal by Sohan Lal judgment-debtor against an appellate cider of the District Judge Partabgarh, confirming an order of the Civil Judge, Chittorgarh, refusing to stay execution proceedings pending in his court under Order 21 Rule 29 C. P. C.2. Rajmal, Motilal and Ratanlal respondents-decree-holders obtained a decree against Sohan Lal judgment-debtor-appellant for Rs. 2,252/- from the court of Civil Judge Neemuch in the then State of Madhya Bharat on 15-5-52. The decree-holders got the decree transferred for execution to the court of Civil Judge, Nimbahera from where it was transferred to the court of Civil Judge Chittorgarh on the abolition of the court of Civil Judge, Nimbahera, The mother of Sohan Lal filed an objection purporting to be on behalf of Sohan Lal in the court of Civil Judge, Chittorgarh during execution proceedings objecting to the execution on the ground that the decree obtained against Sohan Lal was a nullity as he was a ...
The State of Rajasthan Vs. Shri Riaz Ahmad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Raj152
Ranawat, C.J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court from the judgment of this Court dated the 21st August, 1961.2. Shri Riaz Ahmad and 39 others claimed shares in the Jagir village Baneori, Girdawari Circle Srinagar, Tehsil Ajmer, and they claimed compensation for resumption of their interest in the Jagir in accordance with the provisions of the Ajmer Abolition of Intermediaries and Land Reforms Act, 1955 (No. III of 1955). The Collector of Ajmer objected to these claims on the ground that the shares should be treated as one unit for determination of compensation under the Act and that the compensation should not be assessed by treating them as separate estates. The Compensation Commissioner upheld the objection of the Collector and proceeded to determine the amount of compensation by treating the village to be one estate. Riaz Ahmad and 39 others came in appeal to this Court from the order of the Compensation Commissioner, which was allowed, and it was held...
Mangilal Vs. Bhanwarlal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Raj153
I.N. Modi, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal against a judgment and decree of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Jaipur, dated the 18th November, 1955, in a suit to rendition of accounts.2. The material facts leading up to this appeal may shortly be statsd as follows:The plaintiff is an assignee from defendant respondent No. 2 Jamal. The plaintiff's case, briefly put, was that IB 1948. some 42 persons of Kanhroli constituted a partnership to carry on business in controlled cloth, mis partnership was admittedly dissolved some 'time in August, 1949, when it is said that Government control on cloth was somewhat relaxed and so it was decided that a new partnership among the ten defendants respondents be constituted in the name and style of kapda vyavsay Sangn, Kankroli, and cloth approximately worth Rs. 525/- which fell to the share of each of these partners as a result of the dissolution of the former firm was accepted as the capital of each of these partners in the new firm.It is the...
Mawad Dan and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-03-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Raj43; 1963CriLJ228
ORDERD.S. Dave, J.1. This is an application in revision by the accused against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, dated the 12th of February, 1962.2. The facts giving rise to it are that the petitioners are undergoing trial for offences under Sections 148, 302, 325, 324 and 323 read with Section 149, I. P. C. in the court of the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpui.3. On 5-2-62, the Public Prosecutor presented an application requesting the trial court to permit him to prove detailed injuries received by P. Ws. Bachna, Dhanroop and Gajja by examining Dr. A. M. Singhvi. Learned Counsel for the accused contested this application on the ground that copies of the injury reports were not supplied to his clients before the said three injured persons were examined in the court. In the alternative it was urged thai it' the prosecution was permitted to produce fresh evidence, the accused should be allowed an opportunity to cross-examine all the eye-witnesses again. The learned Sessions...
Gram Panchayat, Godawas Vs. Municipal Board, Neemka Thana and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-03-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Raj42; 1963CriLJ226
ORDERD.S. Dave, J.1. This reference comes on the report of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar, dated the 31st October, 1961. It relates to a peculiar case of its own kind, because the parties arrayed against each other are the Gram Panchayat Godawas and the Municipal Board, Neem-ka-Thana.2. On the 19th of April, 1961, the Station House Officer, Neem-ka-Thana presented a report before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Neem-ka-Thana for taking proceedings under Section 145, Cri. P. C. against the said parties. The Municipal Board, Neem-ka-Thana was named as Party No. 1 and the Gram Panchayat Godawas was named as Party No. 2. It was stated in the said report that both the parties were holding cattle fairs at a place called Jodla Johra at Neem-ka-Thana, that since both the parties wanted to hold fairs on the same dates, there was a likelihood of the breach of peace, that a separate report to bind down both the parties for keeping peace was already made under Section 107, Cri. P. C. ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›