Rajasthan Court September 1966 Judgments
The State of Rajasthan Vs. Khimla and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1966
Reported in: 1967CriLJ1248
B.P. Beri, J.1. This is an appeal against acquittal by the State of Rajasthan directed against the judgment and order of the Munsif-Magistrate, Jalore, dated 30th September, 1964, whereby he acquitted respondents Khimla and Dalia of an offence under Section 215 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Circumstances leading up to the present appeal briefly stated are these : Two bullocks of Khima son of Teja were stolen from village Kanana. Some persons followed the track of the bullocks and eventually discovered that they were stolen by Khimla son of Doonga, Dalia and Thania. The search party asked for the return of the bullocks, but Khimla son of Doonga, Dalia and Thania demanded Rs. 400/- for the restoration of the bullocks, and eventually a sum of Rs. 380/- came to be settled, and on the payment of the said amount the bullocks were returned on 26th August, 1962, in village Rama, where the three persons aforesaid resided.A report was made to the Police Station, Balotra, A case under Section 379, ...
Tag this Judgment!Atma Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-22-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj239
Bhandari, J.1. The following four questions have been referred by a Division Benchof this Court to a larger Bench:(1) Whether Rule 2 of the Rules made by the Collector, Ganganagar under Section 22 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959, lays down the requirement that the draft electoral rolls along with the notices must inter alia, be placed at the office of the Municipality concerned and at two conspicuous places in each ward therein under Clauses (a) and (b) of the said rule, or, this provision relates only to the publication of the notice? (2) If the answer to the above question is in favour of the petitioners, whether the want of publication of the draft electoral rolls in strict conformity with the aforesaid rules amounts to a defect of a fundamental nature in the process preliminary to the election, and if so, whether such a defect would, by itself, be sufficient to vitiate the election in a writ petition? (3) Whether Anop Chand's case (supra) correctly lays down the law in so...
Tag this Judgment!Raghbir Singh Mathur Vs. Rajasthan Financial Corporation
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-1966
Reported in: (1969)ILLJ403Raj
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a second appeal by an unsuccessful plaintiff and raises a short question about the interpretation ofRegulation 5 of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation (Payment of Gratuity to Employees) Regulations hereinafter to be referred as the Gratuity Regulations. The relevant facts which are not in dispute may be outlined as follows.2. Plaintiff Raghbir Sahai joined the service of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation, hereinafter to be referred as the ' Corporation ' on 5 May 1955, when he was 52 years of age. On 1 April 1956, he was confirmed on his post with retrospective effect from the date of his original appointment. He attained the age of 55 years on 23 August 1958. He was normally to be retired at that age, but thereafter his further retention in service was ordered by the Corporation. This further extension could be for a fixed period of one year at a time and the services were not to be extended beyond the age of 60 years. After 23 August 1958 the plaintiff got ...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmichand and ors. Vs. Ramkumar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj272
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Alwar, whereby he dismissed the plaintiff's suit except for a simple money decree in a sum of Rs. 320 against Fatehlal only. The action was commenced by the plaintiff-appellant Kanhaiyalal on 22-2-1945 in the court of the District Judge, Alwar and by it he sought a declaration that Fatehlal (defendant No. 2) was the adopted son of one Hiralal and he had a right to mortgage the shop in dispute with him and and he sought the consequential relief of possession of that shop from the defendants. The case with which the plaintiff-appellant came to the court was briefly this :2. The dispute relates to a shop situate in the Alwar City. It originally belonged to one Hiralal who died in the year 1920 without leaving any male issue. Hiralal was survived by his widow Smt. Dhanni. According to the plaintiff Fatehlal defendant was adopted by Smt. Dhanni sometime in the Samvat y...
Tag this Judgment!Chandmal Naurat Mal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Raj20
ORDER1. The case before us comes on an office report to the effect that a joint petition filed by 41 petitioners for restraining the respondents from enforcing the provisions of the Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act (Act No. 38 of 1961), 1961, the Rules made thereunder and the bye-laws made by the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Kishangarh. is not maintainable in view of Rule 375 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952 hereinafter to be referred as the 'Rules', on the ground that the relied claimed by the petitioners cannot be said to be founded on the same cause of action The office points out that while the petitioners may have similar or identical causes of action, they cannot be said to have the same cause of action within the meaning of the Rules.2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contested the correctness of the office report and as, since the enactment of Rule 375 of the Rules by S. R. O. No. 6 of 9-10-64 a practice has grown up in this Court not to entertain such joi...
Tag this Judgment!Chhatar Singh Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Raj194; (1968)ILLJ483Raj
ORDER: The President is satisfied that the retention of Shri Chattar Singh, Assistant Engineer, Northern Railway Jodhpur, in service is prejudicial to National security and that the said Shri Chattar Singh ought to be removed from service. (2) The President is further satisfied under Sub-clause (c) of the proviso to Clause (2) of Article 311 of the Constitution that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold an enquiry in the case of the said Shri Chattar Singh. (3) Accordingly, the President hereby removes the said Shri Chattar Singh from service with effect from the 22nd January, 1966. By order and in the name of thePresident of India. Sd/- P. B. Jain 15-1-66, (P. B. Jain) Deputy Director, Railway Board.' The order has been issued in the name of the President of India and has been authenticated by a Deputy Director of the Railway Board. In accordance with S. O. No. 2297 dated 3rd November, 1958, made by the President regarding the authentication of ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›