Rajasthan Court September 1963 Judgments
Shiv Ram Vs. Shiv Charan Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj126
Modi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Election Tribunal, Jaipur City, dated the are April, 1963, by which the election of the appellant, Shri Shiv Ram, to the Legislative Assembly of this State, at the last General Election was declared to be void. Both the appellant and the respondent, along with certain otner persons with whom we are not concerned in this appeal, stood as candidates for election to the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly from the Mahuwa Constituency. The appellant was declared successful on the 26th February, 1962, and the respondent was defeated.Thereupon, the latter filed the election petition out of which this appeal arises on the 11th April, 1962. Tne sole ground on which this petition was filed was that on the date of the election, the appellant was not qualified to stand for the same as he was of less than the minimum age of 25 years prescribed for this purpose by Article 13 of the Constitution. According to the respondent, the app...
Tag this Judgment!Dhannalal and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-20-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj106
Beri, J.1. These two writ petitions moved by two Cinema Exhibiters of Abu Road and Chittorgarh challenge their liability to pay additional entertainment tax under Section 6-A of the Rajasthan Entertainment Tax Act and can be conveniently disposed of by a single judgment.Writ Petition No. 411 of 1961:2. Dhannalal as the proprietor of Ganesh Railway Talkies, Abu Road, states that he runs a cinema under a temporary license in the Railway Colony of Abu Road. The State of Rajasthan, respondent No. 1, issued a Notification, published in the Rajasthan Rajapatra dated 1-4-1960, levying an additional entertainment tax at the rate of Re. 1/- per show, for every 100 seats or part thereof with a maximum of Rs. 3/- per show or performance. The Inspector, Excise and Taxation demanded from the petitioner the Additional Entertainment-tax in accordance with this notification. The petitioner protested to the Assistant Commissioner, Excise and Taxation that this additional tax was not legally leviable be...
Tag this Judgment!Ratanlal and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-20-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj123; 1964CriLJ702
Bhandari, J.1. These three Revision Applications have been referred by a Single Judge to a Division Bench. In all these cases common questions of law are involved. We shall first deal with Cri. Revision No. 3 of 1962 Ratanlal v. State. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Baran convicted Ratanlal accused under Section 16(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (Act No. 37 of 1954) (hereinafter called 'the Act') for selling adulterated ghee in the town of Baran which has a Municipality. A complaint was filed against the accused after obtaining permission of the Vice-Chairman of the Municipality who was acting as Chairman in his absence. The accused admitted his guilt. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate sentenced the accused to three months' rigorous imprisonment and payment of Rs. 500/-/- as fine. An appeal was filed by the accused in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Baran. The learned Judge of the lower appellate Court maintained the sentence of imprisonment but red...
Tag this Judgment!Ghansilal Vs. Smt. Bhuridevi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj39
C.B. Bhargava, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Jaipur City. 2. Mst. Bhuridevi plaintiff filed a suit for ejectment of the defendant from immovable property described in paragraph 1 of the plaint. She claimed title to the property on the basis of a registered gift-deed executed by her father on 11th July, 1955 in her favour. 3. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that the gift-deed was not proved to have been validly executed. The District Judge in appeal reversed that finding and held that the registration and execution of the gift-deed was proved. 4. The plea which needs to be referred is that which is contained in paragraph 2 of the written statement viz; 'Para 2 of the plaint is denied, and the plaintiff is put to the proof of the facts stated therein. Plaintiff must prove that a legal and valid gift has been made to her.' 5. The learned Judge, in my view, was wrong in holding that ther...
Tag this Judgment!Munsif Ali and ors. Vs. Ayub Khan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-13-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj183; 1964CriLJ342
ORDERD.S. Dave, Actg. C.J. 1. This reference comes on, the report of the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, dated the 10th May, 1963.2. The facts giving rise to it are that one Ayub Khan filed a complaint for offences under Sections 147, 323, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code against Munsif Ali and eight others in the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jhunjhunu, on 8th September, 1960. On 20th July, 1961 that complaint was dismissed by the Court and the accused were discharged on the ground that the complainant was absent on the previous date of hearing andin spite of a notice having been issued to him, he failed to put in appearance on 20th July, 1961. It was also observed by the Court that no case was made out against the accused on the basis of the evidence which was examined by the complainant by that time. It was alsonoted that the complainant was present at Jhunjhunu and the Reader was sent to call him to the Court and even then he did not care to be present or to produce fu...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Firm Ramdas Amritlal Pali
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-13-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Raj127
ORDERB.P. Beri, J. 1. This revision application is directed against the judgment of the District Judge, Pali, who passed a decree against the Union of India for a sum of Rs. 364/4/- on account of shortage in the goods delivered by the Railways to the consignee. 2. On 17th June, 1955, under Railway Receipt No. Q. 71726, 1197 steel angles and 540 steel squares were booked from Jamshedpur by the Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. to Marwar Pali, the consignee being the Firm of Ramdas Amrit Lal. When open delivery was taken by the consignee at Marwar Pali it was discovered that the consignment was short by 28 steel angles weighing 23 maunds and 32 seers. A shortage certificate was obtained from the railway official concerned at Marwar Pali. Notices dated 21-12-55 under Section 77 of the Indian Railways Act were sent claiming compensation for short delivery. The Eastern, Northern and Western Railways over which the consignment travelled did not settle the claim and the consignee firm, therefo...
Tag this Judgment!Kalu Ram Vs. Shambhoo Singh and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Raj84
ORDERJagat Narain, J.1. This is a revision application by the judgment-debtor against an order of the executing Court refusing to set aside an auction sale on his application under Order 21 Rule 90 Civil Procedure Code. The order was confirmed on appeal by the District Judge. The revision application has been contested on behalf of the decree-holder as well as the auction-purchaser.2. A decree for Rs. 2,142.87 plus Rs. 299.50 by way of costs was passed in favour of the decree-holder on 8-2-60. The decree directed that the mortgaged ornaments would first be sold and appropriated towards the decretal amount and the decree shall thereafter be executed against the defendant for recovering the balance remaining due. The executing Court proceeded to execute the decree both by the sale of the mortgaged ornaments and by the attachment and sale of a house belonging to the judgment-debtor. So far as the ornaments are concerned, it was found that they were of spurious metal and were not worth mor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›