Rajasthan Court January 1974 Judgments
indra Methi and ors. Vs. Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajme ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Raj116; 1974(7)WLN158
ORDERM.L. Joshi, J. 1. These 29 writ petitions by respective 29 petitioners are directed against a 'vigyapati' dated 24-6-1973 of the Board of Secondary Education, Rajas-than, hereinafter called the Board, cancelling the examination of the petitioners for the year 1973 and further debarring some of the petitioners to appear at the ensuing Secondary Examination to be held in the year 1974. They shall be decided by a common order. 2. The material facts which, are almost identical and are also not in dispute in all these petitions briefly stated are these : The Examination for the Secondary Arts was held by the Board at its various centres in March/April, 1973, one of the centre for the aforesaid examination being the Rajkiya Kanya Uch Madhyamik Vidhyalaya, Beawar, which shall be hereinafter referred to as the Beawar centre. The result of the said examination was declared on 14th of July, 1973, but the result of the petitioners was withheld and not announced. On 16-7-1973 a show cause not...
Tag this Judgment!Manilal Vs. Vinay Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN(UC)205
D.P. Gupta, J.1. This is defendant's second appeal in a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction.2. The plaintiff's case is that the houses of the parties are situated at Banswara adjoining to each other. The house of the defendant is to wards the north-east of the plaintiff's house. In a previous suit between the plaintiff's father and Kastoorchand the predecessor-in - interest of the defendant, a compromise was arrived at between the parties to that suit and it was agreed that the plaintiff's father would be allowed to rest the rafters, pat etc. of his bouse In the western wall of the defendant's house and that Kastoorchand would be allowed to construct only one window (Ventilator) towards the 'marh' (shed) and that Kastoorchand would not be permitted to construct more than one window or ventilator in the western wall of his house. On the basis of that compromise, a decree was passed in favcur of the plaintiff's father, a copy of which is on record as Ex. 4 A copy of the comprom...
Tag this Judgment!Chhoteylal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN(UC)200
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This appeal of Chhoteylal has been admitted by this Court only on the question of the adequacy of sentence awarded to him.2. The appellant who was working as Extra Departmental Delivery Agent at the Post Office, Hindoli, was entrusted with money order No. 1552 of Rs. 13 70 to be delivered to one Ghasilal, but instead of delivering the amount of the money order to the addressee he forged the signatures of Ghasilal as well as of one Dharamchand attesting witness and misappropriated the amount. He has been convicted by the learned trial Judge for offences Under Sections 409 and 467 Indian Penal Code and awarded one years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/- under the first count & one year's rigorous imprisonment & a fine of Rs. 500/- under the second count.3. learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant argues that the sentence awarded to the appellant is excessive because the appellant is hardly a boy of 22. As regards fine, it is contended that he is ...
Tag this Judgment!Maha Laxmi and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN(UC)194
M.L. Joshi, J.1. In all these sixty two writ petitions the petitioners who are traders challenge the order of the Collectors of the various Districts banning export of gram, gramdal, barley and barley ghat purporting to have been made in the exercise of powers under Clause 12(d) and (e) of the Rajasthan Food Grains Dealers Licensing Order 1964, hereinafter referred to as Licensing Order.2. The Collector of various Districts in exercise of their power under Clause 12 (d) and (e) of the Licensing Order prohibited the export of the food grains and further restricted their movement inside the State by the imugned orders. The short controversy involved in all these petitions is whether the Collector of the District is competent to put a ban on the movement and export of the food-grains under the Licensing Order.3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the Central Government may by the order prohibit the export of any food-grain. This power can as well be delegated Under Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhai Ishar Das Vs. Smt. Govindi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Raj45; 1974(7)WLN123
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal directed against the judgment, and decree passed by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City, dated 31st May, 1972, by which the learned Judge set aside the decree passed by the trial Court and decreed the plaintiff-respondent's suit declaring that the property in question, which is the outer chowk of a house situated at Chowkri Purani Basti in the City of Jaipur belongs to the plaintiff-respondent and the sale of the same in execution of the decree obtained by Ambalal against the judgment-debtor Ganganarayan, was ineffective against the plaintiff. He also issued a perpetual injunction against the defendants restraining them from interfering with the plaintiff's possession over the suit property.2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:--One Ambalal obtained a money decree against one Ganganarain on May 6, 1947. In execution of that decree the suit property was sold on October 8, 1956, and the defendant-respondent Smt. Dhap...
Tag this Judgment!ShivnaraIn Singh and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN(UC)165
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This appeal of Shivnarain Singh and Lal Khan is directed against the judgment dated 27th of June, 1970, of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi, convicting both the appellants Under Sections 447 and 323 Indian Penal Code.2. The incident in this case had taken place on 23rd of October, 1966 at the well Serawa situated in the boundaries of village Akdara. There is long drawn dispute between the parties about the ownership of this well and the land attached to the well bearing Khasra Nos. 20, 21, 22 and 23. The Jagirdars of the village claimed that the aforesaid land belonged to them whereas the cultivators asserted their right as Khatedara in the land denying any share to the Jagirdars. It is since 1948 that the dispute between the parties started but ultimately on 31st of January, 1966 the Settlement Officer declared 2/6th share in favour of the Jagirdars. Appellant Shivnarain Singh represents his wife Mst. Suakanwar in whose favour 1/3rd share, in the disputed land wa...
Tag this Judgment!Kundanmal Vs. Mst. Saku Bat
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN(UC)215
S.N. Modi, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant Kundanmal in a suit for the recovery of money.2. The plaintiff respondent Mst. Saku Bai instituted the suit against the defendant for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 11280/- on the basis of a khata for Rs. 10,000/- alleged to have been executed by defendant Kundinlal on 10-11-69. The plaintiff alleged that the sum of Rs. 10,000/- was borrowed by Kundanmal who executed the khata. The loan was to carry interest at the rate of fourteen annas percent per mensem. On the defendant's failure to repay the amount, the plaintiff brought the suit for the recovery of Rs. 10,000/- as principal and Rs. 1280/- by way of interest--total Rs. 11280/-. The defendant-appellant admitted having executed the khata Ex. 1 but denied that he received consideration. It was pleaded that the khata Ex. 1 was executed at the instance of the plaintiff's husband PW 4 Dhanraj as the latter required such khata for income-tax purposes. The defendant further alleged that the...
Tag this Judgment!Uda and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN(UC)250
K.D. Sharma, J.1. These two jail appeals filed by Uda and Gopiya convicts arise out of a single Judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udaipur, where by Uda appellant was convicted Under Section 397. I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of fine to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months and Gopiya appellant was convicted Under Section 394, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months.2. The prosecution case against the two appellants was that on 28th October, 1971, at about 10 or 11 a.m. Mitha Lal visited Madbu Lal's house in village Giloond. He took his food there with Madhu Lal and after a short stay left for village Jashma on a bicycle. When he started from the house of Madhu Lal, be had a small bag also with him. He reach...
Tag this Judgment!Kansingh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN(UC)290
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. learned Counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Kan Singh has urged that his client has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar, for an offence Under Section 323 Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to three months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/-, or in default to further undergo three months' simple imprisonment, and as it is his first offence he should be given the benefit of the provisions of Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act as the appellant has already undergone 20 days' simple imprisonment and is prepared to deposit the fine imposed by the trial ourt.2. learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State has no objection if the accused appellant is released on probation maintaining the substantive sentence already undergone and the sentence of fine.3. Looking to the nature of the injuries sustained by the victim Bhom Singh and other circumstances in which the incident had taken place, I am incline...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Council Vs. Bhanwarlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN58
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. Municipal Council, Jaipur, has filed this appeal against the judgment of the Municipal Magistrate First Class Court No. 2, Jaipur date 3rd July, 1969 whereby respondent Bhanwarlal milk vendor was acquitted of the charge under Section 16 read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called the Act).2. On the 13th of May, 1966, at about 8.30 a.m. the Food Inspector took from the respondent sample of milk after conforming to the formalities enjoined by the Act and added 16 drops of formalin in each of the three bottles in which the sample was divided. After the sample was examined by the Chief Public Analyst & was found deficient a complaint was lodged against the respondent in the court of the Municipal Magistrate on 17-11-1966. The accused surrendered himself before the Court on 19th of December, 1966. The learned Magistrate, on the basis of the prosecution evidence found that the milk contained 42% of water and that 3% of the original fat ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »