Rajasthan Court August 1969 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.
Balkishan and anr. Vs. Harlal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Raj36; 1969()WLN408
P.N. Singhal, J.1. The defendants, who have been unsuccessful in both the courts below, have filed this second appeal against the judgment and decree of District Judge of Balotra dated March 31, 1962.2. The facts are quite simple. The parties are neighbours and it is not disputed that site-plan Ex. 3 correctly shows the location of their houses. It is apparent from the plan, and is not in dispute, that there is no door or window in the southern wall of the house of the defendants opening on land marked D. There is however a dispute regarding the ownership of that piece of land for, while the plaintiffs claim that it belongs to them and has been in their possession for a long period, the defendants claim that it is a part of a public way and is open to access and has been used by them for more than 25 years.It is however not in dispute that the houses of the plaintiffs open on this land and they have their 'chabutaris' also towards it. The plaintiffs learnt that the defendants wanted to...
Rampal Garg Vs. Shrimad Dayanand Orphanage
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN601
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment as well as arrears of rent and mesne profits. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated within a narrow compass. There is a building situate on Srinager Road Ajmer belonging to the plaintiff Shrimad Dayanand Orphanage, Ajmer. Some apartments of this building on the ground floor as well as on the first floor were rented out to the defendant-appellant Rampal by a rent-note dated 17th December, 1962 (marked Ex. 1) The plaintiff? case is that the defendant Rampal sublet a portion of the leased premises without the permission of the landlord and had then by incurred the liability o[ being evicted from the premises in question Another ground relied upon by that plaintiff for ejecting the defendant is that the defendant had built a suitable residence for himself behind Aryanagar and had shifted to that house It may be stated here that the plaintiff had also re lied upon certain other gro...
Nirmal Kumar Vs. the Co-operative Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-19-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN322
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree of District Judge, Kota, dated September 30, 1958 dismissing his suit with costs.2. The suit has been filed against the Co-operative Bank Ltd., Kota (defendant No. 1), hereinafter called the 'the Bank', to avoid a mortgage made by plaintiff Nirmal Kumar's father Zorawarmal (defendant No. 7) in favour of the Bank on April 22, 1948 and the decree passed on its basis, as also for partition of the joint family property The relationship of the parties will be clear from the genealogy mentioned in the judgment of the trial court. It will be sufficient to say that the mortgaged property formed part of the self-acquired property of one Gulabchand.He had two sons Shobhagmal and Zorawarmal (defendant No. 7). Gulabchand executed document Ex. A 4 regarding his property sometime before his death in 1936 by which he gave the suit house to Zorswarmal. Zorawarmal had two sons Nirmal Kumar (plaintiff) and Nem Kumar, ...
State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. the Bundi Electric Supply Co. Ltd., Bu ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Raj24
Bhandari, C.J.1. These two cross-appeals arise out of a suit filed by the Bundi Electric Supply Co. Ltd. against the State of Rajasthan in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Bundi, on 4th September, 1957.2. Briefly the allegations of the plaintiff, as stated in the plaint, are that an agreement was executed between the plaintiff and the Government of the former Bundi State on 9th October, 1945. It is Ex. 1 on the record. Under this agreement, the plaintiff agreed to erect an underground line of about five miles to supply electric energy to Phoolsagar palace and also to maintain the same at its expense for a period of fifteen years on the terms and conditions set out in Ex. 1. The main terms and conditions are given below:--'The extension of the underground line will be completed within a period of three months. No sooner the line is energised by the company, the State will take connections at Phoolsagar and the State may take connections for testing water of a few wells for the purpose o...
Hakim Ghulam Mohammed Vs. Dr. Zahoor Mohammad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Raj171; 1969()WLN411
ORDERJagat Narayan, J.1. This is a revision application by the defendant against an order of the Additional Munsif No. 1, Jaipur City holding that the agreement dated 12-12-49 is compulsorily registrable. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the evidence on record. I am satisfied that the decision of the trial Court on the question of valuation is correct.The agreement relates to two passages one running north and south and the other running east and west. The passages running to the north and the south and to the east and west leading to a latrine formerly belonged exclusively to the plaintiff. Under the agreement the northern portion of the passage was given to the defendant and the southern to the plaintiff and the roof of the southern passage was made joint. The valuation of the portion of the property the ownership of which was transferred under this agreement is more than Rs. 100. The defendant examined Shri Bhanwarlal, as an expert and he valued the ...
Dr. Harumal and ors. Vs. Smt. Sahjadi Bibi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1969
Reported in: 1969()WLN429
C.M. Lodha, J.1. These are two connected appeals arising out of two suits for ejectment instituted by the landlord Smt. Sahiadi Bibi against Dr. Harumal and Sugnomal (deceased) respectively. It appears that Sugnornal died during the pendency of the suit and is now represented by his heirs, Sita Devi and others. The facts and the questions of law involved in both the appeals are identical and, therefore, it would be convenient to decide them by a common judgment.2. Dr. Harumal and the deceased Sugnomal were admitted as tenants by the Custodian of Evacuee Property on 28-1-48 in the Second and third storeys respectively of the house in question. The rent settled with Dr. Haru Mal was Rs. 3 per month and that with Sugnomal Rs. 6/8/- per month. The plaintiff Sahjadi Bibi purchased this property from the Competent Officer, Ajmer., on 26-9-53, and, thereafter on 18-11-53 she gave notices to both the tenants to vacate the property as the same was required by her for personal use and occupation...
Jeewanmal and ors. Vs. Dr. Dharamchand Khatri and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Raj84; 1969()WLN519
ORDERV.P. Tyagi, J.1. This writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by Jeewanmal, Parmanand and Bhagwandas against Dr. Dharamchand and nine others praying that the judgment of the Senior Civil Judge, Ganganagar dated 1st June, 1963, dismissing the suit of the petitioners filed under Section 9 of the Specific Belief Act may be quashed.2. The facts giving rise to this litigation are as follows:Petitioners are the refugees who were allotted three pieces of land known as Ahatas Nos. 67, 71 and 72 situate in Mandi Pilibanga in the District of Ganganagar. This allotment order was made on 5th of May, 1961, and the Settlement-cum-Managing Officer, Ganganagar issued Sanads to the petitioners to evidence the transfer of the lands to them. It is said that on 3rd of December, 1961, the possession of these three plots of land was handed over to the petitioners by the revenue Patwari in compliance with the orders of the Settlement-cum-Managing Officer, Ganganagar. The pe...
Prakash Chandra and ors. Vs. Gumanmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN309
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal in a suit for redemption of mortgage of a house situated in Nallah Bazar, Ajmer.2. One Smt. Kesar Bai mortgaged the house in question to Ghisulal, father of defendant-respondents Nos. 1 to 4 for Rs. 1,300/-by a registered mortgage died sometime in 1933 A.D. Kesar Bai died on 19-9-1945. It is alleged by the plaintiffs that she had executed a will in favour of her brother's son Parkash Chandra on 12-0-1943 Prakash Chandra obtained letters of administration on the basis of the will on 17-9-1957 and served a notice dated 24-5-1961 on Ghisoolal requiring the latter to give him possession of the mortgaged property, on payment of the mortgage money. However, Ghisoolal did not comply with the notice and died sometime thereafter. Consequently, Parkash Chander as well as his father Mathura Das filed the present suit on 25 5-64 in the court of the Munsiff City (West), Ajmer against the present respondents Gumanmal and others who are the sons of...
Parasmal and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN479
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This is an application under Section 561-A Criminal. Procedure Code filed by accused persons Parasmal and three others to quash the order of this Court dated 24th August, 1968, passed in the revision application filed by the State against the applicants.2. The facts leading to this application are as follows.3. One Prahlad Ram went to purchase diesel oil, from the diesel, pump owned by Pukhraj. father of accused Shantilal, at Bilara. When he, made an approach to Shantilal to deliver diesel, Prahlad Ram was told by Shantilal to come next day to take the delivery of diesel as his tank was empty on that particular day. Prahlad Ram suspected a foul play at the hands of the accused and, therefore, he chose to sleep at the diesel pump. According to Prahlad Ram the applicants poured in the night, some kerosene oil from the tins in the tank in order to sell the mixture to Prahlad Ram next morning. A report was made to the police immediately of the action taken by the accused p...
Ashiq Ali and 6 ors. Vs. Phata Widow of Ashrafali and Roshan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN597
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This case has been wrongly described and registered as a second appeal. It ought to have been registered as a miscellaneous appeal from an order of remand under Order 41. Rule 23 C.P.C, by the District Judge, Pali, dated 8-7-67. The office is directed to make necessary correction.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal by Defendants Nos. 1 to 7 may be briefly narrated, as follows. The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 Smt. Phata filed a suit for possession of two shops in question situated in Pali on the basis of title and alleged that the defendant appellants had occupied the the same with the permission of the plaintiff's mother. This suit was registered as Civil Original Suit No. 28 of 1954 and was tried by the Civil Judge, Pali, who decreed the suit on 27-11-1951, but on appeal by the defendants the suit was dismissed on 4-7-60 by the District Judge, Pali. Smt. Phata filed a second appeal to this Court, but the same was dismissed in limine on 10-10-60. A review applicatio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »