Rajasthan Court November 1968 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Harish Chandra Vs. Mohan Kanwar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-04-1968
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)475
Rajindar Sachar, J.1. The plaintiff respondent-landlords filed a suit for ejectment against the appellant-tenant-defendant on the ground that he was their tenant & has not paid rent & was in arrears of rent from July 1, 1960 to May 31, 1963 The appellant denied the allegation and maintained that be was not tenant of the plaintiffs. He also denied that he was in arrears of rent.2. The lower court, by its judgment dated May 27, 1966, negative the plea of the appellant and held that the plaintiffs are the landlords. He also held that the plaintiffs were entitled to arrears of rent from July 1, 1860 to May 31, 1963, and thereafter, mesne profits from June 1, 1963 to the date of the institution of the suit He, therefore, decreed the plaintiffs' suit for ejectment and arrears of rent. Aggrieved against that, the tenant filed an appeal before the learned District Judge, who accepted the plea of the tenant in so far as the eviction was concerned and eel aside the trial court's decree in so far...
Ram Singh Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Raj227; 1969CriLJ1009; 1968()WLN95
ORDERL.S. Mehta, J. 1. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Merta, by his judgment dated 9-12-1965 convicted the accused Ram Singh for an offence under Section 123 read with Section 42, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 500, and also ordered issue of process against the accused Ramavtar Gupta. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that driver Ram Singh contravened the provisions of Section 42/123. Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 by plying truck No. R. J. A. 1128 of Jaipur region in Jodhpur region, in contravention of the terms of the permit. Ramavtar Gupta, is the owner of the said truck. On a plea of guilty, Ram Singh was convicted and sentenced, as aforesaid. The owner of the truck, Ramavtar Gupta, was ordered to be summoned by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, to face trial. Against that order a revision-application was filed in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Merta. The said Judge, while relying upon an authority of this Court, reported in Bagh Singh v. State of Raj...
Thakurji Shriji Dwarkadeeshji Vs. Gappulal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1968
Reported in: 1968WLN99
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. This second appeal arises from the appellate judgment and decree of the District Judge of Jaipur City dated May 17, 1962 because of the dismissal of the plaintiffs' suit for eviction.2. There is a temple of Thakurji Shri Dwarkadheeshji in Jaipur City. The defendant took four shops of that temple on rent, when it was under the management of the State Government, on a rent of Rs. 150/- per mensem, and thereafter he took the other two shops on a rent of Rs. 65/- per mensem. Devendra Prasad was appointed as the 'adhikari' of the temple in November 1949. Verandahs were added to all the six shops in 1953 and a consolidated rent of Rs. 251/8/- per mensem was fixed for them from that time. It was pleaded in the plaint that the shops were let for the period ending July 31, 1957 and that the defendant sub-let all of them for unlawful gain. It was also pleaded that the defendant did not pay the rent after September 30, 1957, in spite of notice Further, it was pleaded that the ...
Chhotulal and anr. Vs. Hema Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1968
Reported in: 1968WLN236
C.B. Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal by the employer against the order of Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Bikaner, dated 9-10-1967, allowing compensation Rs. 5040/- to the respondent.2. The appellants were running a saw mill in the city of Bikaner and the respondent was employed as a workman at that mill. The respondent's case before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner was that on 17-8-65 while he was performing his duty at the saw mill his left hand at the wrist joint was cut and amputated on account of which he suffered permanent partial disability causing reduction of his income.3. The appellants contested the application and the learned Commissioner framed the following issues:1.Whether the applicant received personal injuries during the course of andout employment? (Applicant)2.Whether the injuries sustained by the applicant resulted in the amputationof his left hand below the elbow? (Applicant)3.Whether the notice of accident was served to the non-applicant within thepr...