Rajasthan Court October 1975 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.
Khilli Ram Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-21-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)418
P.D. Kudal, J.1. This is an appeal by the accused-appellant Khilli Ram, who has been convicted by the learned Special Judge (Sessions Judge), Bharatpur, in Special Sessions Case No. 2 of 1970, under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 5(1)(d)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, to two years rigorous imprisonment by his judgment dated 16-9-1971.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant Ramswaroop PW/2 bad presented two private complaints before the learned Munsiff Magistrate, Bayana, who had forwarded the same to the Police Station, Bhusawar for enquiry. It appears. that the complaint PW/2 Ram Swaroop was harbouring an honest impression that no investigations are being conducted by the police. He then bought this fact to the notice of the police by an application dated 10 1-1969. A report was asked for vide Ex. P/4 from the Police Station, Bhusawar. On 25-3-1969, the SHO submitted the report that the complainant PW/2 Ram Swaroop is in the habit o...
Chaturbhuj and ors. Vs. Ramjeevan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-20-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj162; 1975WLN(UC)476
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This is defendants second appeal against the judgment and the decree dated 23rd January, 1967 of the learned Senior Civil Judge No. 1, Jodhpur and it arises out of the following circumstances: 2. The plaintiff had a house in Sonaronki Ghati, Jodhpur. To the north of this house is situate a Chabutari on which an idol of Shri Hanumanji was installed by the Sunars. Residents of Mohalla filed a suit in the representative capacity for a declaration that the Chabutari belonged to the residents of the Mohalla. In the northern wall of plaintiff's house there is a 'Jharokha' having apertures 1' x 1' admitting light and air in a 'Maliya' (room) on the first floor of the building. In the year 1968 the defendants in their representative capacity attempted to close the 'Jharokha' by raising a wall on the Chabutari. This conduct of the defendants was resisted by the plaintiff and he was compelled to bring a suit against the defendants with a prayer that a permanent injunction be iss...
Gafoor Vs. Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur Region and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj166; 1975()WLN700
ORDERD.P. Gupta, J.1. This is a writ petition in the matter of grant of temporary stage carriage permits on Ajmer-Sarwar via Srinagar, Ramsar, Debrela, Barada route (hereinafter referred to as 'the route') and it arises in the following circumstances:--Lalchand, respondent No. 2, was granted a temporary permit on the route by the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur Region, Jaipur (hereinafter called 'the R. T. A.') on June 24, 1975 and a permit was actually issued to him in pursuance of the aforesaid grant on July 3, 1975. But probably he realised that the grant of the aforesaid temporary permit in his favour was not proper and so he surrendered the aforesaid temporary permit granted to him. On July 7, 1975 Lalchand submitted another application for grant of a temporary permit on the route, in which the purpose for which the permit was required was mentioned as 'under Section 62 (1) (c) of M. V. Act to meet particular temp, need'. An application for grant of a temporary permit on the ...
Kundan Lal Vs. Hanuman Das
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-17-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)434
Kalyan Dutta Sharma, J.1. This is an application in revision against the order of the District Judge, Bikaner, dated 5-3-1973, by which the order of learned Munsiff, Bikaner, dated 3-11-1972 striking out the defence of the petitioner in civil suit for ejectment, was confirmed.2. This revision petition came up today for hearing before this court, The learned Counsel for the petitioner has filed an application that the revision petition may be allowed and the orders of both the courts below may be set a side in view of the recent amendment in Section 13A of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950. The amendment relied upon by the learned Counsel for the petitioner reads as follows:(i) for the expression ''notwithstanding anything in Section 13, Sub-section (1)(a) or Sub-section (4) and the provision there to or Sub-section (5), as they existed before the commencement of the amending ordinance.' the expression 'Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Act, ...
K. Haqiquatullah Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-17-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)528
C.M. Lodha, J.1. A show cause notice was issued to the non-petitioners in this case regarding admission of the writ application In response to the show cause notice, the State of Rajasthan has filed a detailed reply to the writ petition itself.2. The complaint of the petitioner is that the declaration given by him as the publisher of the weekly newspaper 'Paigame Haqiquat' has been wrongly cancelled by the District Magistrate, Jodhpur. by his order dated June 28. 1975 (Exhibit R/3). It has been contended that no opportunity of showing cause as provided in Section 8B of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (which will hereinafter be referred to as 'the Act') was given to she petitioner. It is also contended that Section 8B has no application to the facts and circumstances of the present case.3. The reply on behalf of the State is that the petitioner had ceased to be the printer and publisher of the newspaper mentioned in the declaration, inasmuch, as he had not published the pa...
Lalita Devi Vs. Radha Mohan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj1; 1975()WLN520
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. Smt. Lalita Devi has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District' Judge, Jaipur City, dated January 24, 1974, dismissing the suit of the petitioner appellant filed under the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act for the dissolution of the marriage with respondent Radha Mohan2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are in nut-shell as follows :Lalita Devi was married to Radha Mohan at Jaipur on 5th April, 1963. Out of this wedlock she gave birth to four children, out of whom two have already died. The grievance of Lalita Devi against Radha Mohan was that Radha Mohan was addicted to liquor and that he was not doing any work to earn the livelihood to maintain the petitioner Lalita Devi. Her further grievance was that Radha Mohan was a person of loose character indulging in sex with other ladies and that he was in love with one Chandra with whom letters were exchanged by Radha Mohan assuring Chandra to marry her and to keep her as his second wife.La...
Municipal Council Vs. Goga Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)427
M.L. Shrimal J.1. This is an appeal by special leave directed against the judgment dated December 14, 1970 of the Municipal Magistrate, First Class (West), Jaipur acquitting the respondent Goga Ram under Section 16 read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act). On 7-9-1966. at 12.30 p.m., respondent Goga Ram was found carrying 30 K.Gms of milk, in a container, for sale. The Food Inspector T.N. Saxena suspected the milk to be adulterated. He issued a notice in the prescribed form to the accused and purchased 750 Grms. of milk for .75 paisa. The receipt evidencirg the payment of the amount to the accused is Ex. P1 which bears the signature of the Food Inspector Trilckinath Saxena, thumb-impression of the accused respondent Goga Ram and the signatures of the two attesting witnesses viz, PW 2 Badri Narayan and Nand Kishore. He divided the milk in the three parts. Each part was then put into one clean dry bottle. 16 drops of forma...
Kheta and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1975
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)211
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. Appellant Kheta has been convicted of the offence under Setions 302/323 IPC and appellant Mallu has been convicted of the offence under Section 323 IPC Kheta has been sentenced to imprisonment for life on the first count and three months' rigorous imprisonment on the second count. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Appellant Mallu has been sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 323 IPC. The third accused Hameera was acquitted of the offence under Section 323 IPC.2. The relations between the family of deceased Bishna and the accused Kheta were not co-ordial. Accused Kheta was not allowing Bishna and his family to irrigate their field. On November 25, 1973, there was a feast at the house of Smt. Bhani, Doongar and his two brothers with their families had gone to join the feast. The deceased Bisna and his wife Ramdevi were at the house. It is said that the accused Kheta came to the house of Bishna and called ...
Mohanlal Vs. Rameshwar Dayal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-09-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj4; 1975()WLN542
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This appeal raises an important question relating to the interpretation of the expression 'liquidated sum' as appeared in Section 9(1)(b) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Respondent No. 1 Rameshwar Dayal, who was a creditor of Messrs. Mohanlal Yadram, presented an application before the District Judge, Alwar, praying that Mohanlal and other partners of the firm be declared as insolvent. This petition was contested by the opposite parties on the ground that the credit of the petitioner was not a liquidated sum and, therefore, the petition was not maintainable under Section 9 of the Act. In order to decide the controversy raised by the opposite party Mohanlal appellant it will be necessary to set out certain relevant facts. 3. Petitioner Rameshwar Dayal carries his business in food grains and 'sarsoon' at Alwar in the name and style of 'Rameshwar Dayal Ashok Kumar'. Opposite parties Mohanlal, Kailash Chand and Ratan Lal al...
Dr. Lalit K. Sharma Vs. Principal and Controller S.M.S. Medical Colleg ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-08-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj34; 1975()WLN577
ORDERM.L. Joshi, J.1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks by appropriate writ, direction or order quashing of the notice Annexure 5 of the Principal and Controller of S. M. S. Medical College dated 15th of May. 1975, and as a consequence it is prayed that the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 be directed to hold selection of the students to the postgraduate medical training in accordance with the criteria laid down in the regulation framed under Section 33 of the Indian Medical Council Act hereinafter called the Act,2. Certain facts giving the background of this petition deserve to be noticed to understand the nature of the relief and the circumstances in which it is being asked for.3. The petitioner passed his final M.B.B.S. Examination from S. M. S. Medical College, Jaipur in May, 1974. Thereafter he completed one year of compulsory rotating internship training which was completed on 14th of May. 1975 and obtained full registration with the Medical Council The ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »