Rajasthan Court August 1963 Judgments
Ram Gopal Vs. Bhikam Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj229
ORDERJagat Narayan, J.1. This is a revision application by one of the defendants against an order of the executing Court dismissing his application purporting to be under Section 3(1) of the Partition Act 1893.2. Bhjkam Chand respondent No. 1 instituted a suit for the partition of two properties. -- one measured about 167 sq. yds. and referred to as house and the other measured about 57 sq. yds and referred to as a Bara. It is not disputed that the share of Bhikam Chand in these properties is 3/5th, the share of Ram Gopal applicant is 1/5th and the remaining 1/5th is owned by Karnidan, Ram Kishan and Jaikishan. In para 9 of the plaint it was alleged by the plaintiff that the Bara was indivisible and it was prayed that it may be auctioned amongst the co-sharers. Further it was stated that if the Court was of the opinion that the bigger property was also indivisible that may also be sold by auction amongst the sharers. In para 9 of the written statement Ram Gopal defendant admitted that ...
Tag this Judgment!JaIn Brothers and Company, Bundi Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-19-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj17
Modi, J. 1. This a plaintiff's second appeal in a suit for refund against the defendant State, which has been dismissed by the Court below on the ground that it is barred under Article 62 of the Limitation Act. It has been placed before this Bench, having been referred by one of us, sitting singly, as the question of limitation involved in this appeal was considered by the learned single Judge to be not free from serious difficulties.2. The material facts leading up to this reference lie in a narrow compass. The plaintiff was a firm dealing in cloth at Bundi. The Customs Department of the defendant State recovered from the plaintiff on certain cloth imported by It during the period extending from the 19th August, 1949 to the 29th August, 1949, a sum of Rs. 894/9/9 as sales-tax in addition to the prescribed duty. The plaintiff's case was that the State had no authority to recover any money by way of sales-tax. Consequently the plaintiff after giving the necessary notice under Section 80...
Tag this Judgment!Narpat Raj Vs. Babulal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj92
Modi, J.1. This is an appeal by the decree-holder Narpat Raj in an execution matter and arises under the following circumstances.2. The appellant along with two others obtained a decree against the respondents Babulal and others for Rs. 30,000/- together with interest and costs on the 17th January, 1953, in a suit for recovery of mortgage-money. The case of the appellant was that he was a minor at that time and continued to be so until some time after the 9th January, 1956. On the date last-mentioned, this decree was compromised during the course of execution proceedings which had been commenced on an application of the decree-holders dated the 9th February, 1953, and this compromise was arrived at between Sampat Raj, (who it may incidentally be mentioned is the grandfather of the appellant) counsel for the decree-holders, and the judgment-debtors, and the whole decree was settled for a sum of Rs. 29500/- only. On the 3rd March, 1956, the respondents paid this amount to the said Sampat...
Tag this Judgment!Anantmal and ors. Vs. Lala and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-08-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj88
C.B. Bhargava, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for recovery of arrears of rent. Plaintiffs who are members of a joint Hindu family, filed the present suit against Lala, Hira and Jawahara sons of jora and Ghisa son of Moti and grandson of Jora and Mt. Juphi widow of Moti. Jawanara died after the institution of the suit and the suit is being continued against the re-maining defendants.2. Plaintiffs' case is that Jora usufructuarily mortgaged his agricultural lands with their ancestors on 26th November, 1911 and executed a registered mortgage deed in their favour. On the same day, Jora took back the mortgaged land for cultivation on an annual rental of Rs. 199/8/- for a period of three years. A registered lease deed was also executed by Jora on that very day. Plaintiffs' case further is that Jora during his life time and after his death his sons continued cultivating the land on the same terms and paid rent to them up to smt. 1996. But thereafter, they did not pay...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Niranjan Kajaria Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-07-1963
Reported in: 1964CriLJ614
L.N. Chhangani, J.1. The facts giving rise to this revision are not in as-puts and may be briefly stated as follows-The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi, allotted some quota of skimmed milk powder ff sais in Rajasthan State ana the Rajasthan State Government, while appointing different dealers for different areas, appointed the petitioner as a dealer for the Ajmer area vioe its letter No. F. 9(1)(6)/lnd/(C) Sup/59 dated the m October, 1959, and allotted a quota of 50 tons of skimmea milk powder. The allotment was made subject to the following conditions-1. That the milk powder was to be sold at 72 nr. per in polythene bags, per head at a time.2. That the material was required to be sold to omy bona fide small consumers. In on case, it was to be sold to the Halwaies, Confectioners, Tea-stalls etc.2. In violation of these conditions, which the petitioner had undertaken to fulfil, he delivered 167 bags of 50 lbs each of the said milk powder to a Calcutta party namely, Sh...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›