Rajasthan Court March 1963 Judgments
Surja Ram Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Raj202; 1963CriLJ396
Ranawat, C.J.1. This is an application of Surja Ram son of Ratiram from jail under Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The petitioner Surja Ram was convicted by the Court of the Sessions Judge of Ganganagar on the 19th of July, 1948 under Sections 302, 307 and 309, Bikanet Penal Code and he was sentenced to death under Section 302 and to 10 years' and 9 months' rigorous imprisonment under Sections 307 and 309 Bikaner Penal Code respectively. The judgment of the Sessions Judge was confirmed by the High Court of Bikaner and also by Bikaner State Council. There after His Highness the Maharaja of Bikaner commuted the death sentence into a sentence of imprisonment for life by his order dated the 13th of December, 1948 (vide copy of the order at page 5 of the paper book). In the said order it was further mentioned that life imprisonment was deemed, to be imprisonment for 20 years only. After the comtiu-tation of the sentence of death, the Superintendent of Jail referred the matt...
Tag this Judgment!Jaiwant Rao Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Raj203
I.N. Modi, J.1. These are three connected appeals and arise out of the same facts, which have been the subject-matter of two separate suits filed by the same plaintiff Jaiwant Rao against the defendant State. Appeal No. 292 of 1953 has been filed by the plaintiff and arises out of suit No. 206 of 1954. The remaining two appeals Nos. 173 and 569 of 1962 arise out of suit No. 25 of 1957, and of these, the former has been filed by the plaintiff and the latter by the defendant State. I propose to dispose of all these three appeals by a single judgment.2. The basic facts out of which these appeals arise are practically admitted or proved. The plaintiff Jaiwant Rao originally belonged to the service of the covenanting State of Kotah as it then was. When that State was integrated with the first United State of Rajasthan in 1948, he held the post of a Supervisor of the Opium Factory at Kotah having been appointed to it by an order dated the 10th November, 1948, It seems that the plaintiff was ...
Tag this Judgment!Moolchand and anr. Vs. Maharaj Kumar Jai Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-19-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Raj219
Dave, J. 1. This is an appeal by two electors Moolchand and Nandkishore under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (which will hereinafter be referred as 'the Act') against the order of the Section Tribunal (Single Member), Jaipur, dated the 15th September, 1962, dismissing their election petition under Section 90(3) of the Act. 2. It is common ground between the parties that the appellants Moolchand and Nandkishore were electors for the Malpura Constituency of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly. Respondent Maharaj Kumar Jaisingh was one of the candidates for election to the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly from the said constituency during the election which was held In February 1962, and he was declared elected. The appellants challenged the validity of the respondent's election by an election petition which came for hearing before the said Tribunal. Shri C.L. Agarwal appearing as a counsel on behalf of the respondent raised a preliminary objection to the effect t...
Tag this Judgment!Motilal and anr. Vs. Jaswant Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-16-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj11
D.M. Bhandari, J.1. This is a Civil Second Appeal in a suit under Order 21, Rule 63 C.P.C. filed by the decree-holders (sic) Govind Singh and Nahar Singh and Bhagwat Singh, sons of Ugrasingh, who was the Jagirdar of Thikana Agria in Jensu Amet. Moti Lal and Kesrimal (Defendants Nos. 1 and 2) had a decree against Shri Ugrasinghji, the amount of which had accumulated to the tune of Rs. 24,080/-/- in the year 1950. They put their decree in execution and attached disputed lands described in the list attached to the plaint. Thereupon, the plaintiffs filed an objection under Order 21, Rule 58 C.P.C. which was dismissed on the 19th of April 1955. The plaintiffs then brought the suit for declaration that the disputed land belonged to them on the 19th of way 1955 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Udaipur. The plaintiffs based their claim on two pattas both dated Kartik Badi 9, Sambat 2005 corresponding to the 26th of October 1948.These pattas are Exhibits 11 and 12 on the record and that both th...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rita Mazumdar Vs. University of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj64
Ranawat, C. J. 1. An application was made by the petitioner Smt. Rita Mazumdar on the 12th of November 1962 under Article 226 of the Constitution. It was alleged that the petitioner appeared at the M.Sc. Final Examination held by the Rajasthan University in the year 1961 and that Professor Haldar who was internal examiner failed to give marks on each question and instead he put 66 marks in all for the practical chemistry examination out of a total of 200 marks. It was also alleged by the petitioner that she did do very well in her sessional work and may have obtained as many as 40 to 45 marks out of a total of 50 marks reserved for sessional work. The petitioner did not allege that 40 or 45 marks for the sessional work were not included in the total of 66 marks and at the time the petition was heard, the counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mathur, expressed hisinability to enlighten the Court whether the total of 66 was inclusive or otherwise of the marks for the sessional work. The Court ...
Tag this Judgment!Verma Motors and ors. Vs. Labour Commissioner and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ43Raj
D.M. Bhandari, J.1. These writ petitions are disposed of by this judgment as all of them arise oat of the order dated 15 November 1960, passed by. the authority to hear and decide claims for the payment of minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (hereinafter called ' the Act ') A number of workmen filed claims under Section 20(1) of the said Act for the amount paid less than the minimum wages against the owners of a number of motor buses. These claims covered the period, between 1 January 1959 and 30 October 1959. In order to appreciate the basis of their claims it is necessary to refer to the two notifications, one issued by the Government of Ajmer, and the other issued by the Government of Raj as than. In exercise of the powers conferred by 01. (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 and Sub-section (2) of Section 5,of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Act XI of 1948), the Chief Commissioner, Ajmer, fixed the minimum wages payable to employees employed in the employment in public moto...
Tag this Judgment!Bijey Cotton Mills Ltd. and ors. Vs. Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ47Raj
D.M. Bhandari, C.J.1. The Government of Rajasthan Industries Department through its notification No. D244/F. 5 (67) Lab./58, dated 15 May 1959, referred to the industrial tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur, the industrial dispute between the management of Bijey Cotton Mills, Ltd., Bijeynagar, and the Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Bijeynagar, in respect of certain matters which are specified in that notification. Before we refer to the points which were referred for giving an award to the industrial tribunal, it is necessary to refer to certain facts on record. Bijey Cotton Mills, Ltd., Bijeynagar, was registered under the Indian Companies Act and had its registered office at Bijeynagar. It appears that from the year 1953 it had had a very tottering career. It was closed on 1 April 1953. It resumed work on 15 May 1954 and after about three years it was again closed on 22 June 1957. It again resumed work on 3 March 1958. Services of some workers of the weaving department were retrenched on 30 A...
Tag this Judgment!Amar Singh Vs. Additional Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Raj ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-07-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR876(Raj)
DAVE J. - These are thirteen references made by the Rajasthan Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, under section 86(2) of the Rajasthan Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1953, which will hereinafter be referred to as 'the Act'.The facts giving rise to them are as follow :On the formation of the United State of Rajasthan in the year 1948, an Ordinance, No. 27 of 1948, was enacted with a view to provide for the abolition of all judicial and police powers which vested in the jagirdars by that time. This was called the United State of Rajasthan Jagirdars (Abolition of Powers) Ordinance, 1948. This Ordinance was followed by Ordinance, No. 10 of 1949, called the United State of Rajasthan Jagirdars (Abolition of Powers) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1949. By virtue of section 4 of this Ordinance, a new section 8A was added after section 8 of the previous Ordinance. This section 8A ran as follow :'8A. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, it is hereby enacted that the rev...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›