Rajasthan Court July 1966 Judgments
Nenuram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj50; [1967]20STC551(Raj)
Modi, J.1. This is a writ petition by Nenuram under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that the assessment order made by the Sales Tax Officer, Jodhpur, dated the 24th August, 1961, be quashed and that an appropriate direction or order be issued to him and the other respondents, namely, the State of Rajasthan and the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Excise and Taxation, Jodhpur, restraining them from making any recovery from the petitioner in pursuance of it.2. The material facts are these. The petitioner is an approved contractor of the Public Works Department of the State. In connection with the construction of a police lines building at Pali, the Chief Engineer of the State had invited tenders for supplying and fixing wooden windows and doors together with frames and painting them around April or May, 1959. The petitioner's tender in which he quoted rates for joinery and painting work at 61/4 per cent and 10 per cent below the scheduled rates respectively was accepted, being the l...
Tag this Judgment!Nawal Kishore Dubey Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-28-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj82
D.S. Dave, C.J. 1. This is a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Shri Nawal Kishore Dubey, who was holding the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in the State of Rajasthan till 11th September, 1901. On the 11th September, 1961 four Deputy Superintendents of Police including the petitioner were retired compulsorily from the government service under Rule 244 (2) of the Rajasthan Service Rules by order of the Government. It was noted in the same order that they were permitted to proceed on privilege leave to the extent due, not exceeding 120 days, from the 18th of September, 1961. It was further ordered that their retirement would be effective from the date of expiry of such leave if availed of by them, otherwise with effect from 18th September. 1961.The petitioner's case is, that he did not avail of the earned leave which stood to his credit and, therefore, his retirement, according to the said order, became effective from the afternoon of the 18th Sep...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmed and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj190; 1967CriLJ1053
ORDERB.P. Beri, J. 1. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directed against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Pali, dated 6th July, 1966, who maintained the conviction and sentence of the applicants under Sections 295 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The circumstances leading up to the present application for revision briefly stated are these: On 7th April, 1964 some ladies of Jetaran went for worship to the temple of Mataji outside Mertji Darwaja near Jagannathji-ki-Bavri, Jetaran. To their suprise they did not find the idols in the temple and even the Chabutra on which the idols stood and the steps leading to the Chabutra were found damaged. On 8th April, 1964 some Hindu residents of Jetaran made a report to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jetaran that in the said temple there were idols of Seetlamataji, Achparaji, Bodarji and others and these idols were removed dishonestly from the Chabutra by some Musalmans which has occasioned an injury t...
Tag this Judgment!Gopi Shanker and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj159; 1967CriLJ922
L.N. Chhangani, J.1. These seven appeals are directed against the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur, dated 23rd of December, 1965. In Sessions Case No. 16 of 1965/31 of 1965 the Additional Sessions Judge tried the seven appellants for offences under Sections 376, 342 and 323, Indian Penal Code. After trial, he found them all guilty and convicted them and awarded sentences as detailed below :-- Gopi Shankeru/s 376, P.O. 5 years R. I. & fine of Rs. 500/-; in default, one year's R.I. u/ss 342 |6 months R.I. &fine; of Rs. 50/-; in default, two month R. I. on each count.323 | r/w 34 | Mahesh Chand u/s 376 5 years R.I. &fine; of Rs. 100/-; in default, six months R.I.Shiv Kumar | Dhan Singh | Sher Singh | Tulsi Ram | u/ss 342 | 6 months R I. &fine; of R. 50/-; in default, two months R. I. on each count.Ram Chander | 323| r/w 34 || All the sentences to ran concurrently. 2. Each of the seven convicts has filed a separate appeal challenging his convictions and...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Gulkandi and ors. Vs. Prahlad and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Raj51
Modi, J.1. This is a defendants' civil regular first appeal in a suit for declaration and possession.2. The dispute relates to the estate of one Puranmal. It is common ground between the parties that the said Puranmal died without any male issue of his own, and had three daughters born to him, namely, Msts. Durga, Gulkandi and Dhapoo. The first of these died some time in 1950. The other two are appellants defendants before us. Apart from these two, the other two appellants are Ramchander and Badri Prasad, father and son, in whose favour Msts. Durga and Gulkandi sold two shops belonging to their father by a registered sale-deed (Ex. P-C) dated the 21st February, 1946, for a sum of Rs. 4500.3. The plaintiff respondent Prahalad's case was that he had been adopted as a son by Puranmal by a registered deed of adoption (Ex. P-A) dated the 23rd Jan., 1938, and as a result thereof succeeded to the entire estate left by his adoptive father who had admittedly died on the 4th February, 1938. It m...
Tag this Judgment!Laliya and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj134
L.N. Chhangani, J.1. This is a joint appeal by Laliya. Jaganriath, Jeewan, Chothia and Gheesa and is directed against the order and judgment of the Sessions Judge. Alwar dated 27-11-1965, convicting the first three, appellants for offence under Section 396, Indian Penal Code, and sentencing them to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200; in default, one year's further rigorous imprisonment, and the remaining two appellants for an offence under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, and sentencing them to three years' rigorous imprisonment.2. The facts material and relevant for the disposal of the appeal may be stated as follows: It is alleged that on 7-8-1964 at about 4 of 5 O Clock seven persons including the five appellants, armed with guns and lathis, arrived in the 'Bazar' of village Bamanwas and looted a few shops. After the commission of dacoity they left the village along with booty. A good number of villagers collected and immediately chased the offenders and over-took...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›