Rajasthan Court July 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.
Sire Kunwar and ors. Vs. Dilkhush Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-31-1970
Reported in: 1970WLN424
C.M. Lodha, J.1. The respondent Dilkhushlal filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 8587/-against Onkar Singh, father of the plaintiffs in the present case, Shive Singh and Dalpat Singh on the basis of a 'rukka' dated 7-8-1954 That suit was registered as Civil Suit No. 73 of 1957 in the Court of Additional Civil Judge, Udaipur. Onkar Singh filed his written statement on 6-5-1957 and resisted the plaintiffs' suit on a number of grounds. A copy of this written statement has been placed on the record, and marked Ex. 2. He denied the execution of the 'rukka' and in the alternative pleaded that Dilkhushlal, who had been Kamdar some time back may have obtained his signature on the 'rukka' by fraud. He also pleaded that in any case the 'rukka' was without consideration. He also pleaded the bar of limitation as well as challenged the maintainability on the suit on the basis of the 'rukka' on the ground that the 'rukka' amounted to only an acknowledgement which could not be made the basis of the suit....
State of Rajasthan Vs. Satya Nand Sardana
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-31-1970
Reported in: 1971WLN573
C.B. Bhargava, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Bundi, dated 28th November, 1962.2. The respondent is a P.W.D. contractor who by virtue of an agreement between the parties was given a contract for the construction of an earthen dam at village Talvas. It was a lump-sum contract and the work was to commence from 30th October, 1954, and was to be completed within a period of eight months. For some unavoidable reasons, the work could not be completed within the agreed time and the respondent applied for extension of time to the Chief Engineer and the latter vide Ex. A-2 dated 27th October, 1956 allowed extension of time upto 15th March, 1957 Even upto this date the work was not completed and it appears from Ex.3 dated 17th April, 1957, that the Executive Engineer gave directions to the Overseer to see that the work was finished before the rains set in. However, the work remained in progress even after the rains and continued upto ...
Dhani Bai and ors. Vs. Neem Kanwar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Raj9
C.B. Bhargava, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff and directed against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge No. 1. Jodhpur. dated the 11th December, 1962. involves a question of unusual character for decision.2. The parties to the case are known as Bhagats that is offsprings of dancing girls. Chaterdas and Girdharidas were real brothers, the former being the elder one. Chaterdas had only one son that is Dhansukhdas the plaintiff. Plaintiff's case is that on Migsar Vadi 1st Smt. 1954. corresponding to 25th November. 1897 he was adopted as Dwvamush-yayana son by Girdharidas whose first wife had died about a year after the marriage and since then the latter gave UP the idea of remarrying and adooted an attitude of renunciation. However, near about Smt. 1962. he married Mst. Sigrati and from her a daughter named Ramrakhi who is defendant No. 1 was born. Defendant No. 2 is the son of Ramrakhi. Girdharidas and Chaterdas remained joint till Jeth Sudi 15. Smt. 1987 when they divide...
Manohar Singh Vs. Smt. Sushila Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-1970
Reported in: 1971WLN(UC)43
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. Before hearing the learned Counsel for the parties in this case I made an effort in Chambers, for a compromise between the parties. I am sorry to say that it has not been successful.2. The appellant and the respondent were admittedly married on June 10, 1951. The appellant ultimately obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights on February 11, 1961. He presented the present petition under Section 13(IA)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act on April 21, 1965 for dissolution of the marriage by a decree for divorce on the ground that there was no restitution of conjugal rights as between the parties to the marriage for a period of two years or upwards after the passing of the decree. The respondent decided the contention of the petitioner in this respect and pleaded that she had lived with him as his wife and was prepared to live with him. She specifically mentioned, in paragraph 6(b) of her reply, the periods of time during which she and the petitioner lived and coha...
Nemichand Vs. Ganeshmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj181
C.M. Lodha, J.1. The facts giving rise to this second appeal by the plaintiff lie within a narrow compass:2. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 Ganeshmal and Sardarmal executed a mortgage deed dated 1-3-54 for a sum of Rs. 8000/-in favour of the plaintiff Nemichand. Shri M.K. Rathi, an Advocate of Aimer presented the mortgage deed on behalf of the mortgagee plaintiff Nemichand before the Sub-Registrar, Ajmer on 1-7-1954 which was the last date for presentation of the deed, the limitation prescribed for the purpose being four months from the date of execution. The Sub-Registrar returned the document the same day with the following endorsement:--'Mr. M.K. Rathi counsel for Nemichand present. The above presentation along with the document does not appear to be valid, and further the time prescribed for registration expires to-day and there is no time left to enforce the appearance of the opposite party. Therefore, in view of Section 4 of the Indian Registration Act no further action can be taken. Th...
Nemi Chand Vs. Ganeshimal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1970
Reported in: 1970WLN357
C.M. Lodha, J.1. The facts giving rise to this second appeal by the plaintiff lie within a narrow compass.2. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 Ganeshmal and Sardarmal executed a mortgage deed dated 1-3-1954 for a sum of Rs. 8000/- in favour of the plaintiff Nemichand. Shri M.K. Rathi, an Advocate of Ajmer presented the mortgage deed on behalf of mortgage-plaintiff Nemichand before the SubRegistrar, Ajmer on 1-7-1954 which was the last date for presentation of the deed, thelimitation prercribed for the purpose being four months from the date of execution. The Sub-Registrar returned the document the same day with the following endorsement:M.K. Rathi counsel for Nemichand prerent. The above presentation along with the document does not appear to be valid, and further the time prescribed for registration expires to-day and there is no time left to enforce the appearance of the opposite party. Therefore, in view of Section 4 of the Indian Registration Act no further action can be taken. The document ...
Jagan Nath Vs. Kachhulal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-28-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj112; 1970(3)WLN442
C.M. Lodha, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal arising out of a suit for injunction for restraining the defendant from interfering with the moiety of common wall on his side, intervening the houses of the parties in the third storey and for a mandatory injunction also for demolition of that part of the construction in the defendant's house which had been made to rest on the wall in question. 2. The facts are not in. dispute. There is a common wall between the houses of the plaintiff and the defendant. The width of the wall is 16'. In the third storey the plaintiff raised the width of half the party wall on his side leaving the moiety of the wall on the side of the defendant for the latter's use. The plaintiff then built his third storey by making use of the moiety of the wall on his side. Some time in the year 1954 A. D. the defendant also raised construction in the third storey of his house by fixing some 'patties' etc. in the moiety of the wall on the plaintiff's side. The pla...
Laxmi NaraIn and ors. Vs. Firm Ram Kumar Suraj Bux and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj30; 1970(3)WLN372
Jagat Narayan, C.J.1. These three appeals arise out of a suit filed under Section 73(2), Civil P. C. by firm Ram Kumar Suraj Bux, against Laxmi Narain,, Smt. Surya Kumari and the legal representatives of Samar Singh which was decreed in part by the Senior Civil Judge No. 1, Jaipur City.2. The plaintiff firm Ram Kumar Suraj Bux as well as Samar Singh, Smt. Surya Kumari and Laxmi Narain, defendants obtained decrees against one Shiv Behari Tewari from different courts and put them into execution. The amounts of the decrees at the time of execution were as follows:--CourtAmountof decree1.PlaintiffSenior Civil Judge, Jaipur1,68,033.002.Samar SinghDistrict Judge, Bhilwara38,667.623.Laxmi NarainSenior Civil Judge, Jaipur1,79,009.004.Smt. Surya KumariCivil Judge, Shahpura (Bhilwara)8,520.003. Shiv Behari Tewari worked as a contractor in the Irrigation Department. Payment of Rs. 57,509/- was to be made to him by the Executive Engineer (Irrigation), Kankroli. Kankroli is situated within the juri...
Hariram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-16-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ448
L.S. Mehta, J.1. By his judgment, dated De. camber 6, 1967, Sessions Judge, Partapgarh has convicted the accused Uda Barad and Laxman for the offence of murder of Mst. Laduri w/o Pyara Meena, aged about 45 years, Under Section 302/34, IPC, and sentenced them to imprisonment for life each. They have also been convicted under B. 363, IPC. for kidnapping Mst Rajki d/o Pyara. aged about 16 years, and sentenced to rigorous 4 imprisonment for two years each. They were further convicted Under Section 148, IPC, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The accused Laxman has also been found guilty Under Section 392, I. P.C., for taking away a silver 'Hansali' of Mst. Rajki and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years. The appellants Hariram and Onkar have been convicted Under Section 302/149, I. P.C., and each of them has been sentenced to imprisonment for life. They have further been convicted Under Section 363, I.P.C., and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonme...
Onkar and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-16-1970
Reported in: 1970WLN417
L.S. Mehta, J.1. By his judgment, dated Decembar 6, 1967, Sessions Judge, Partabgarh, has convicted the accused Uda Barad and Laxman for the offence of murder of Mst. Laduri w/o Pyara Meena, aged about 45 years, under Section 302/34, I.P.C., and sentenced them to imprisorment for life each. They have also been convicted under Section 363, I.P.C., for kidnapping Mst Raji d/o Pyera, aged about 16 years, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years each. They were further convicted under Section 142, I.P.C., and sentenced to rigorous imprieonment for one year each. The accused Laxman has also been found guilty under Section 392, I.P.C., for taking away a silver 'Hansali' of Mst. Rajki and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years. The appellants Hariram and Onkar have been convicted under Section 302/149, I.P.C , and each of them has been sentenced to imprisonment for life. They have further been convicted under Section 363, I.P.C., and sentenced to two years' rigorous im...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »