Rajasthan Court August 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.
Basudev Vs. Damodar Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj115
C.M. Lodha, J. 1. In this second appeal by the defendant-tenant two points have been argued on behalf of the appellant. It is contended in the first instance that Section 2 (2) Proviso (e) of the Raiasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (which, hereinafter, will be referred to as the 'Act') is ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and is, therefore, liable to be struck down. It is submitted that it is on account of the aforesaid provision that the defendant-appellant has not been given protection of the said Act. In the second place it is contended that the finding of the learned District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur, that the plaintiff requires the room in question bona fide for his personal necessity is not sustainable on account of omission on the part of the learned Judge to consider that only a little before the service of notice of termination of tenancy, the plaintiff had let out other rooms in the building. 2. I would first consider the q...
Bhanwarlal Vs. Jadawali and Chothia
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-1970
Reported in: 1970WLN776
S.N. Modi, J.1. This appeal by the complainant Bhanwar Lal is directed against the order of the Additional Munsif-Magistrate, Merta City, acquitting the accused-respondents of the offence under Section 448 IPC.2. Briefly put, the case of the complainant was that in execution of a decree of a civil court the salesamin of the District Court, Merta, auctioned the house in dispute. The sale was confirmed by the executing court on 22.8 64 and a sale certificate was issued in favour of Bhanwarlal on 19.5.65. On 17 5.66 the sales amin handed over possession of the house in dispute to Bhanwarlal after breaking open its lock, as the judgment debtor accused-respondent Mst. Jadawali was not present at the house. The sales am in also prepared a list of the property lying in the house and handed over to PW 1 Sampatraj vide superdinama Ex. P. 3. Bhanwarlal put certain goods inside the house and locked it. It is alleged that on the night between the 17th and 18th May, 1966 the two accused respondents...
Umrao Chand and ors. Vs. Inder Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1970
Reported in: 1970WLN494
C.B. Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of the Senior Civil Judge No. 1 Jodhpur, dismissing the plaintiffs suit for partition and recovery of arrears of rent.2. For the proper appreciation of the facts, the following pedigree showing the relationship of the parties is set out below: Udaichand | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | Dharam Chand Kewal Chand *Zorawar Mal | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | Umrao Chand @Dhanpat Chand 'Inder Chand (Plaintiff) (died in Smt. (Deft. 1 along with 2009 Migsar V. 2= his sons & grand-sons 3-11-1952 (defts. 2 to 5) *Zorawar Mal | --------------------------- | | Himmat Mal (D.W.12) Chanda Mal | ------------------------------ | | Mohan Mal Sumat Mal (D.W. 8) @Dhanpat Chand | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | Ugam Chand Manohar Paras Prakash Prem Chand Pratap Chand (Deft. 6) Chand Chand C...
Tewari Jhoomarlal Swaroop Lal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-26-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj251; 1970(3)WLN811
ORDERV.P. Tyagi, J. 1. Messrs. Tewari Jhoomarlal Swarooplal has filed this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution and it arises out of the following circumstances :The petitioner firm, got a lease of an area of 30 sq. miles in three blocks of 10 sq. miles each in Tehsils Bayana and Rupbas on a dead rent of Rs. 2 lac per annum for a period of five years commencing from 1st May, 1961. For some reason the lease agreement could not be executed and, therefore, the State Government preferred to cancel the lease of the petitioner firm. The Mining Engineer, Kota, by his letter dated 21st of August. 1963 informed the petitioner that the possession of the leased area including all working and other pits, trenches, quarries, etc., were taken over by the Mining Department from 21st August, 1963, and the petitioners were directed not to quarry the sandstone and also not to carry on any work incidental thereto in that area. The Department had raised certain claim against the petition...
Mangalji Chhotey Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-25-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Raj1
C.M. Lodha, J. 1. The only point for decision in this second appeal by the plaintiffs is whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the refund of the earnest money deposited by them with the defendant State of Rajasthan at the time of submitting their tender for supply of maize and iowar?2. The trial court decreed the suit for refund of Rs. 2500/- being the earnest money and also for Rs. 450/- as interest thereon, total Rs. 2950/-. On appeal by the defendant, the suit was dismissed. Consequently the plaintiffs have come in second appeal to this Court.3. The facts relevant for the purposes of this appeal are as follows:The State of Rajasthan by a notification (Ex. A. 4) published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated 6-12-1953 invited tenders for purchase of Baira. maize Jowar etc. The tenderer was required to make a deposit at the rate of -/4/- for each maund of grain to be supplied, as earnest money with the Commissioner. Civil Supplies. Rajasthan. It was further provided by Clause (8) of the s...
Pritam Singh Vs. Ranjit Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-25-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Raj59; 1972CriLJ337
ORDERKan Singh, J. 1. These are two revision applications directed against the orders passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Karanpur on 12-5-1969 in proceedings under Section 145 Criminal Procedure Code. The two revision applications present similar features and can conveniently be disposed of together. I may narrate the facts with reference to S. B. Criminal Revision No. 88 of 1970. 2. Pritamsingh, Party No. 1, inthe proceedings before the learned SubDivisional Magistrate made an application under Section 145 Criminal Procedure Code to the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate on 17-9-1968 in respect of squares Nos. 33 and 35 of Chak No. 1 N, and alleged that the petitioner was in peaceful possession ofthese squares, but party No. 2, Ranjitsingh had unlawfully taken possessionof the land and destroyed the cropraised by party No. 1. This land wasentered in the name of Ram Singh'sson Harbans Singh, Harbans Singh wasalleged to have sold this land to partyNo. 2 Ranjitsingh, but in ...
Central Bank of India Vs. Govind Narain
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj306; 1970(3)WLN758
Chhangani, J. 1. These four appeals arise out of two suits between the same parties, the earlier being a suit for mere arrears of rent and the later being a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment in respect of the same premises and are connected with each other and deserve to be disposed of by one judgment.2. The material facts may be stated as follows :--In the city of Jodhpur outside the Jalorigate there is a building known by the name of 'Tapariya Mansion'. It belonged to Shri Jai Narayan Tapariya and his family. In March 1944 a portion of this building was let out by deceased Jai Narayan to Jodhpur Commercial Bank (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bank') at a monthly rent of Rs 150/- per month for a period of five years ending on 31st March, 1949. Although the initial period of the lease expired on 31st March, 1949, the Bank continued to remain in possession of the premises. Negotiations were commenced between Jai Narayan Tapariya and the authorities of the Bank for the terms of the...
Bhanwarlal Vs. Noratmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-19-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Raj19
C.M. Lodha, J. 1. This is a defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit filed by Lalchand. (who has died during the pendency of this litigation and is now represented by his legal representatives Noratmal and others) in the Court of Sub-Judge. First Class, Beawar on 4-7-1953 praying that the defendant may be restrained from interfering with the southern wall of the plaintiff's stair case on the first floor, and may further be directed by a mandatory injunction to restore the wall to its original condition by making such repairs as may be necessary.2. There is a staircase between the plaintiff's shop and the defendant's shop situated in Mewari Bazar, Beawar. This stair case was admittedly used by both the parties, for going to the first floor of their respective shops. It appears that a few years before the institution of the suit the plaintiff built a room on the first floor of his shop, and also constructed a stair case, for going from the first floor to the terrace on the second ...
Malkiyat Singh Vs. Gaij Kaur and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-1970
Reported in: 1970WLN461
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a revision application be a husband against an order of maintenance in favour of the wife under Section 488 Criminal Procedure Code passed by the First Class Magistrate, Ganganagar.2. Malkiyat Singh, the petitioner husband, was married to non-petitioner Gaijkaur sometime in the year 1961. After their marriage Gaijkaur and Malkiyat Singh lived together at Malkiyat Singh's house. Malkiyat Singh was living with his father in village Chak 4M, Tehsil Karanpur. The, relations between the husband and the wife could not remain smooth after sometime and they became bitter. Gaijkaur did not find the conditions of her husband's house tolerable and was forced to ieave her husband's roof and started living with her father in village 4G, Tehsil Karanpur Thereafter there was litigation between the husband and the wife whereas the wife applied for maintenance under Section 488 Criminal Procedure Code in the court of learned First Class Magistrate at Ganganagar, the husband appl...
The State of Rajasthan Vs. the Associated Stone Industries Kota Ltd. a ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-11-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Raj128
Jagat Narayan, C.J. 1. This is an appeal by the State of Rajasthan (defendant No. 2) against a decree of the District Judge, Kota, dated 25-9-58 decreeing a suit instituted against it and against the Union of India (defendant No. 1) by the Associated Stone Industries Kota (hereinafter referred to as the Company). 2. The relevant facts are that the Ruler of the erstwhile State of Kota entered into an agreement Ex. A on 2-5-45 with the Company for quarrying Kachcha stone from the Tehsils of Ramganj Mandi and Chechat. Monopoly rights for quarrying Kachcha stone in these two tehsils were granted to the Company for a period of 15 years from 1-10-44- The terms and conditions contained in Clause 18 (i) of the agreement ran as under :-- 'In consideration of the concessions and privileges granted by the Grantor and in lieu of income-tax, super-tax and excess profits tax, the Grantee covenant to pay to the Grantor royalty on the stone excavated at the rate of rupee one per 100 sq. ft., subject t...