Rajasthan Court November 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.
State of Rajasthan Vs. Hansa Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-12-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ657; 1975()WLN662
ORDERP.D. Kudal, J.1. This appeal has been filed on behalf of the State against the order of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sirohi dated 8-7-1971, whereby the accused respondent was acquitted of the charges under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that on 27-10-1966, at about 1 p.m., the Food Inspector, Sirohi Shri Himmat Chand purchased a sample of grinded 'haldi' from the shop of the accused which was kept by him in the shop for open sale. The 'haldi' so purchased was sealed in three bottles in the presence of motbir Prabhu Lai P.W. 2. Before purchasing the 'haldi', the Food Inspector gave notice Ex. P-l in Form No. VI, and purchased the same vide receipt Ex. P-2 for .84 P, A seizure memo Ex. P-3 was prepared and signed by the motbir Prabhu Lai P.W. 2. One sealed bottle was handed over to the accused-respondent. Another sealed bottle was sent by the Food Inspector to the Public A...
Mangal Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj123; 1975()WLN677
ORDERD.P. Gupta, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Additional Government Advocate on the question as to whether an affidavit sworn before a Notary and presented in this Court should bear a notary stamp of Rs. 3.20 under Article 42 of the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The affidavit which has been presented in this case was sworn before a Notary appointed under Section 3 of the Notaries Act, 1952, but as no stamp was affixed on the said affidavit, an objection was raised by the office that the affidavit could not be taken into consideration as it was not properly stamped. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no stamp duty is leviable in case an affidavit verified by a Notary is presented in this Court. The argument of the learned counsel is twofold. In the first instance he relies upon a notification issued by this Court on January 29, 1963 and published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated February 21, 1963 Pa...
Mangilal and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)448
M.L. Jain, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baran, dated 27th August, 1971, by which he convicted the accused appellants Mangilal and Ladhoolal under Section 304 part II, I.P.C. and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for five years and three years respectively.2. I have beard arguments and perused the record. The prosecution case appears to be that on 24th October, 1969, Prabhulal Teli of village Talav within police station Khatoli, District Kota, with his wife Mat. Pushpa went to cultivate his land known as 'Beed Kankad' in the after-noon. After sometime accused Nathulal, Mangilal, Ladhoolal and Jailal also came there. Since Prabhulal was plaguing the field on the northern side , the accused began to do so from the opposite side. He approached and asked them not to plough his field. Thereupon, the accused persons are alleged to have begun beating him with Chakkar, Parnia. Lathi and gadansi, in furtherance of their common intent...
Mohammed Shafi and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-07-1975
Reported in: AIR1977Raj6
ORDERD.P. Gupta, J.1. These five writ petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common order as common questions of law arise for determination in these cases.2. The challenge in all these writ petitions is with regard to the reciprocal agreement arrived at under Sub-sections (3-A) and (3-B) of Section 63 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), between the States of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh on April 3, 1975. The petitioner in writ petition No. 1028 of 1975, Mohammed Shafi is an existing operator of Chittorgarh-Begun Singoli Bhensrodgarh route, while the petitioner Bapulal in writ petition No. 1081 of 1975 is an existing operator of Chittorgarh-Begun-Singoli route. Bashir Ahmed, who is the petitioner in writ petitions Nos. 1041, 1077 and 1233 of 1975 is also an existing operator of Chit-torgarh-Bhensrodgarh via Begun and Singoli route. The route from Chittorgarh to Bhensrodgarh via Bebun and Singoli is an inter-Statal route, 140 Kilometers long, out of...
Prabhashanker Vs. Smt. Rukmani and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-07-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj17; 1975()WLN618
S.N. Modi, J. 1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by Kanhaiyalal (since deceased) and his brother Vasudeo to eject the tenant-defendant, who is appellant in this appeal.2. The suit was filed on 11-10-71 when the provisions of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950, were in force. Both the lower courts took the view that the landlords required the demised premises bona fide and reasonably for their own occupation and for the occupation of their family members. The courts below therefore decreed the suit for ejectment in favour of Vasudeo and the legal representatives of Kanhaiyalal who died during the pendency of the suit in the trial court. The tenant has preferred this second appeal. During the pendency of the second appeal in this Court, the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act. 1950. hereinafter referred to as the Act, was amended by the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1975 (Ordinance No....
Smt. Gangabai Vs. Bherulal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-07-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj153; 1975()WLN652
V.P. Tyagi, Actg. C.J. 1. This appeal of Smt. Gangabai is directed against the order of the District Judge, Udaipur, dated March 23, 1974, in Civil Misc. Case No. 69 of 1972, whereby the learned Judge directed that the custody of her minor son Kishanlal shall be returned by Smt. Gangabai, the mother of the boy, to his father respondent Bherulal. As regards the custody of the minor daughter Deu alias Bagdi, aged about 14 years, the learned Judge ordered that she would remain with her mother Smt Gangabai, appellant. That portion of the judgment has not been challenged by preferring cross-objection by Bherulal, respondent. 2. Bherulal was married to Gangabai on February 27, 1957, and out of this wedlock she gave birth to two children, namely, Deu alias Bagdi on January 1. 1962, and Kishanlal on March 2, 1965, They lived in an atmosphere of peace and amity upto 1968, when, it so appears that the relationship between the husband and wife became strained. An allegation was levelled against B...
Masjid Committee Vs. Jhamat Mal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-05-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)471
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This second appeal filed by the Masjid Committee, Ajmer is directed against the judgment and decree dated February 6, 1957 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Ajmer in an appeal filed against the decree passed by the Munsif Ajmer in original suit No. 243 of 1961.2. The plaintiff appellant brought this suit against one Jhamatmal and respondent Nos. 2 to 9 who were the mortgagees or the suit property which has been marked in the Municipal register as property No. 8/99 in Chisti Bazar, Ajmer. According to the plaintiff's case, this property was declared evacuee property by the Custodian and that thereafter, it was handed over to the Masjid Committee, Ajmer, and since then the property being owned by the Masjid Committee. Jhamatmal, according to the plaintiff, was the tenant and therefore a suit for eviction was brought against Jhamatmal but as Jhamatmal claimed that he was the tenant of respondent Nos. 2 to 9 who were the mortgagees of this property, the eight r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›