Rajasthan Court October 1970 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.
Gram Panchayat, Shialawas Khurd and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj263; 1970(3)WLN647
ORDERL.N. Chhangani, J. 1. These two writ applications challenge the validity of the Government Notification No. F. 1/97/LSG/67 Lit. dated 10-12-68, published in the Rajasthan Raj Patra Part VI (Ka) dated 11-12-68 and the subsequent notification No. F. I/97/LSG/67/Lit. dated 16-8-69, published in the Rajasthan Rai Patra Pt. VI (Ka) purporting to exclude some areas from the limits of Shialawas Khurd Panchayat Circle and Bandi Kui Jagir Panchayat Circle and including them in the limits of the Bandikui Municipality and it is, praved that the said notification be quashed and the respondents be restrained from giving effect to and acting upon these notifications. 2. The relevant facts are these--The Government of Rajasthan issued a notification on 10th of December, 1968 proposing to include some areas of Shialawas Khurd Panchavat Circle and Bandi Kui Jagir Panchavat Circle within the limits of the Bandi Kui Municipality and inviting objections, The petitioners submitted objections. The obje...
Madhavlal Vs. Smt. Govindi Bai
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj260; 1970(3)WLN599
C.M. Lodha, J. 1. This is a defendant-tenant's second appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment from a shop situated to Nala Bazar, Ajmer. 2. The plaintiff claimed ejectment on three grounds, namely:-- (i) That the defendant has erected a wooden cabin on the 'chabutra' adjacent to the shop leased out to the defendant without the permission of the landlord: (ii) That the shop is required reasonably and bona fide for the personal necessity of the plaintiff for opening a passage to her residence up-stairs and (iii) That the defendant has sublet the shop. The defendant denied all the above mentioned three allegations. 3. After recording the evidence produced by the parties the learned Munsiff, Ajmer dismissed the plaintiff's suit. On appeal by the plaintiff's learned Additional Civil Judge, Ajmer held that the plaintiff had failed to prove bona fide and reasonable necessity for the shop in question. He also held that the cabin constructed by the defendant did not materially alter the pre...
Durga Dass Vs. Kanhaiyalal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1970
Reported in: 1970WLN563
L.N. Chhangani, J.1. This first appeal by the defendant mortgagor is directed against both a preliminary decree dated 23-7-1962 and a final decree dated 23-11-1962 passed in a suit for the realisation of mortgage money by sale of the mortgaged property.2. The plaintiff Gulabchand, now dead, & represented by respondents Kanhaiyalal and Ramdas, as also by Smt. Kanta Kumari instituted a suit in the Court of Senior Civil Judge. Jaipur City, on 9-5-1957, praying for a decree for an amount of Rs. 35,799-11- and its realisation by sale of the mortgaged property. The plaintiff's case was that the defendant-appellant mortgaged his property detailed in para 1 of the plaint on 6-5-1952 for an amount of Rs. 24, 999/-and executed a mortgage deed and of it registered on 12-6-52. The defendant agreed to pay interest at Rs. 0/12/- percent per month with six monthly rest. There was also an agreement to pay interest on the amount of interest in case the amount of interest was not paid in time. The mortg...
Ramchandra Tanwar Vs. Ram Rakhmal Amichand and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj292; 1970(3)WLN541
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant Ramchandra against the order of Additional District Judge, Shri Ganganagar, dated June 5, 1970, making absolute the ad interim injunction dated March 26, 1970.2. The facts are quite simple. The plaintiff instituted the suit on March 17, 1970, against the Union of India and the present appellant Ramchandra, for the grant of a perpetual and a mandatory injunction under Sections 38 and 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and recovery of damages amounting to Rs. 4,500/-. It was alleged that the plaintiff was a vendor of hot and cold drinks at Hanumangarh railway station, and carried on that business in two stalls constructed by the Railway Administration, and in six trollies, on payment of the fee therefor. The plaintiff paid the vending fee up to December 31, 1969, and any previous notice of termination of the contract was waived by the Railway Authorities. It was therefore pleaded that the plaintiff was surprised when it was informed th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›