Rajasthan Court April 1972 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.
Smt. Kaushliya Alias Maya Vs. Lal Chand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-25-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN282
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a wife's appeal against the judgment of the learned District Judge Aimer dated 14-5-70 dismissing her application for restitution of conjugal right against her husband under, Section 9(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, hereinafter to be referred as the Act2. The wife averred that she was married to the husband at Nasirabad on 4-12-61 according to the Hindu rites. After the marriage the couple lived happily till October, 1967. The wife proceeded to say that her husband had fumed he out of the matrimonial home after giving her a severe beating. According to her, the husband was in desertion without any reasonable excuse. The responded -husband traversed the averments in the wife's petition. He stand that it was the wife who had deserted him and she was being kept back at Nasirabad by her parents and had not come to him even though he had gone to fetch her The learned District Judge framed one issue namely whether the respondent had withdrawn from the society of ...
Motor Owners Insurance Co. Ltd., Ajmer Vs. Mangilal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1972
Reported in: AIR1972Raj271; 1972()WLN212
L.N. Chhangani, J.1. This is an appeal by the Motor Owners Insurance Company Ltd. against the award given by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur (District Judge, Jodhpur) dated 14-4-67 under which the appellant and Safikhan and Safi-mohammad Khan, driver and owner of the truck No. RJQ 3802, have been directed to pay Rs. 7,413.75 P. to respondent Mangilal on account of injury caused to Mangilal by an accident on account of negligent driving of the truck. Safikhan and Safimohammad Khan, the driver and the owner of the truck, have not challenged the award. Only the Insurance Company filed the present appeal through his counsel late Shri Amrit Raj Mehta, Advocate.2. A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the respondent that the appeal is barred by limitation and cannot be maintained. The relevant dates for deciding the period of limitation are as follows :--The award was made on 14-4-67. The appeal was presented on 16-7-67. . The intervening period is 103 days. The appell...
K.D. Ghouri Vs. Bhoio Motawani and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1972
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1658; 1972()WLN319
ORDER1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge Aimer recommending that the sentence of fine of Rs. 50/- passed against the respondent No. 1. accused Bhojo Motwani. Editor, 'Matribhumi' Aimer under Sections 500 and 501 I. P. C be enhanced to a substantive sentence of imprisonment for a period of six months and a fine of Rs. 200/-. Mr. Balkishan Mohanani has appeared before us on behalf of the accused Motwani. He has expressly stated that his client to whom notice has been Given of showing cause why his sentence should not be enhanced does not wish to show cause against his conviction. He has, however urged that the sentence passed by the learned Additional Munsiff-Magistrate First Class. Aimer City East cannot be said to be grossly inadequate and therefore the reference must be reiected. On the other hand Mr. Amrit Kumar appearing for the complainant Shri K. D. Ghouri has hotly contested that the sentence of a fine of Rs. 50/- only imposed by the learned trial court is grossly inadeq...
Gurnam Singh Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1972
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1688; 1972()WLN303
ORDERL.S. Mehta, J.1. The prosecution case, in brief, is that burglary was committed in the house of P. W. I Lalchand. resident of village 6E District Ganganagar. during the night intervening August 16 and 17 1969. Lalchand was sleeping outside the main gate of his house during the night and when he got up in the morning at about 4. he to his surprise found the lock of his box broken. He also saw southern wall of his house broken. The following articles were missing from his receptacle:1. One Karla (silver).2. One pair of Boozli Patti (gold).3. One pair of Paijeb (silver).4. Five gold coins (Mohars).5. Three rings (gold).6. One pair of Surlia Patti (gold).7. One nose pin (gold).8. Rs. 105/-. in cash, and9. Cloth of two designs (about 11 metres).Of the above items. Nos. 1 and 2 belonged to his wife and Nos. 3 to 7 were owned by his daughter Mst. Vidya P. W. 2. On receipt of the first information report (Ex. P. 1). submitted by Lal Chand Sadar Police. Ganganagar. registered case under Se...
Kishorilal and ors. Vs. Ladhu Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-20-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN953
B.P. Beri, J.1. These 6 petitions for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court are directed against a common judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 21-9-71 and can be conveniently disposed of together.2. Briefly stated the circumstances giving rise to the petitions are these. In the Dhan Mandi area of the town of Ganganagar there is a road leading from the Kotwali to the Lakkar Mandi known as Kotwali Road. At its right angle towards the west is the Dharmshala road. Both these are public roads and highways. The width of these roads is 60 feet Some 25 or 30 years before the institution of suits the Municipality of Gangangar let out substantial portion of these public roads to various persons on 'Tehbazari' basis permitting them to put up temporary wooden stalls as shops. In between the stalls and the properties of the plaintiffs in the original suits there is narrow strip of land measuring between 2 and 3 feet. The Tehbazari stalls virtually cover the properties of the plaintiffs a...
Mohanlal and ors. Vs. Ram Prasad and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-17-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN332
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage in respect of a shop.2. Ram Prasad, respondent No. 1, had brought the suit against the appellants and respondent No. 2 Rambux, alleging that his grand-father and father had mortgaged the suit shop situated in village Kanechhan with the appellants' ancestors for a sum of Rs. 25/- on Savan Sudi 13 of Sumvat 1973. Shri Sheonath, the mortgagee, is alleged to have sub-mortgageed it with Shri Baldeo Ramchandra, ancestors of the appellants here.3. The suit was contested by the defendants saying that they were the owners of the shop. They denied the mortgage or sub-mortgage as alleged by the plaintiff. Inter alia they claimed that an amount of Rs. 350/- was spent on repairs of the property. They further pleaded that in the former Shahpura State a mortgage deed irrespective of the amount involved was compulsorily registerable and further was required to have been executed on a stamp and if were not r...
Smt. Satya Devi Vs. Ajaib Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-14-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Raj20; 1972()WLN392
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a wife's appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge. Ganganagar dated 31-1-1968 granting conjugal rights to the husband and directing that the wife snail return and live with the husband.2. The parties were a young couple. They were married according to the Sikh rites on 5-10-1962 at Chak 16, P. S. Tehsil Raisinghnagar. A son was born on 1-7-1964 to the parties. The petitioning husband averred that the wife had gone to see her parents on 28-12-1965, but had thereafter never returned to him. According to him. he went to fetch the wife in the first week of February, 1966. but she refused to come with him without any reasonable excuse. The wife contested the application. She denied that her husband had come to take her away. She pleaded cruelty on his part. According to her. the husband was a drunkard and was not faithful to the wife. He had told her several times that he was not satisfied with her and would marry another girl. The husband...
Sadul Textiles and ors. Vs. Raza Textiles and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-14-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN255
L.N. Chhangani, Ag. C.J.1. This is an appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance against the judgment of the Company Judge dated December 7, 1971. and has arisen in the following circumstances.2. M/s. Raza Textiles Limited and M/s J.P. Srivastava and Sons Private Limited who are respondents Nos. 1 & 2 respectively in this appeal (who shall hereinafter be referred to as the petitioners), submitted a petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act (I of 1956) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) impleading the appellants who shall hereinafter be referred to as the main contesting respondents) and respondents 2, 3. 6 to 9 and 16 (who shall hereinafter be referred to as the proforma respondents) for appropriate orders. After reply by the respondents and rejoinder, the application came up before the learned Company Judge on February 24, 1971. The Official Liquidator, it is agreed, made an oral request for time to file a representation on behalf of the Central Gov...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Shri Sunder Das
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN427
J.P. Jain, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendant State against whom the respondent's suit No. 37/61 for the recovery of Rs. 2016.24 as arrears of salary for the period from 1.6.52 to 18.3.54 was decreed by the Civil Judge. Ajmer and the same was maintained in appeal by the District Judge, Ajmer on 31,3.1965.2. Respondent Sunder Das was joined service in the Agriculture Dept. of the erstwhile State of Ajmer on 10 5.1948. His appointment was temporary. His services were terminated after one month's notice to him with effect from the afternoon of 30.4.1952. The order terminating his service is Ex. A-3 on record. Sunderdas appeared to have represented the matter and he was re-employed on the same post with effect from 19 5.1954. This order has not been placed on record by either party. In the meanwhile, State of Ajmer merged into Rajasthan. By the order dated 24th February, (sic)the Government of Rajasthan in the Agriculture Department passed an order condoning the break of service...
Chand Mal Oswal Vs. Shree Nath Bohra
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-12-1972
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1400; 1972()WLN317
ORDERKan Singh, J.1. The learned Munsif Magistrate. Pali had dismissed a private complaint lodged by Shri Chandmal. Sales Tax Officer for an offence under Section 500 Indian Penal Code against Shri Shrinath Editor Toofan Mail' a local paper of Pali on the around that as required by the rajasthan Government Servants' and Pensioners' Conduct Rules the complainant had not taken the permission of the Government for filing the complaint. Rule 22 of the aforesaid Rules was referred to by the learned Magistrate. It reads:A Government servant may not without the previous sanction of the Government have recourse to any court or to the press for the vindication of his public acts or character from defamatory attacks. In granting sanction to the recourse to a court the government will in each case decide whether the government servant shall institute the proceeding at his own expense and if so whether in the event of a decision in his favour the government shall reimburse him 'to the extent of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »