Rajasthan Court March 1975 Judgments
Mst. Kamli Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-31-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)113
K.D. Sharma, J.1. This is a jail appeal filed by Mst. Kamli convict against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Partabgarh, holding Camp at Chittorgarh, dated 10-10-1974, by which the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 363, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer imprisonment for three months.2. The prosecution case against the appellant was that Chain Kanwar, aged about 12 or 13 years was sleeping along with her elder sister and mother in one of the rooms of her parents' quarter in the night between 1.1.1973 and 5.1.1673. At about 11 p m. she was found missing from the room. Her brother Amer Singh was imformed about her disappearance by her mother. Upon search, it came to the notice of the inmates of the house that a box containing clothes and ornaments was also missing. The brother of Mst. Chain Kanwar tried to find out her where abouts but despite...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Hem Kanwar Vs. Chandra Shekhar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-31-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)125
J.P. Jain, J.1. This appeal arises out of an action brought by Chandra Shekhar, husband, for judicial separation against his wife Smt. Hem Kanwar. Chandra Shekhar succeeded to obtain a decree for judicial separation on the ground of desertion from the Court of District Judge, Udaipur, vide his order dated April 7, 1973. 2. Chandra Shekhar and Smt. Hem Kanwar were married according to Hindu rites on May 11, 1965. She stayed with him upto January 16, 1967. According to husband petitioner, she left his he use on January 16, 1967, with her father against his will. She had also taken away all the gold and silver ornaments with her. According to him he tried his best on several occasions to call her back, but she did not return and in this manner she deserted him for without any justifiable cause. This petition was filed on January 14, 1971.3. Smt. Hem Kanwar contested the petition by her Written statement dated September 10, 1971. The factual aspect of separation is not disputed. She admitt...
Tag this Judgment!N.B. Kanungo Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-28-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN219
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition seeks to challenge the order of promotion of the respondents No. to 3 to 6 to the posts of Assistant in the office of the Salt Commissioner and the petition arises in the following circumstances.2. The petitioner was appointed as a Upper Division Clerk in the office of the Salt Commissioner by direct recruitment on July 5, 1961. He was confirmed in the aforesaid post by the order of the Salt Commissioner dated May 6, 1970 with effect from September 2, 1988. The petitioner was also allowed of cross the efficiency bar on September 5, 1970. According to the seniority list of Upper Division Clerks as on June 1, 1969 the petitioner was senior to the respondents No. 3 to 6 in the aforesaid cadre. The respondents No. 3 and 4 were promoted as Assistant by the order of the Salt Commissioner dated December 26, 1970 with effect from December 24, 1970 on probation for a period of two years. The respondent No. 5 was also promoted as Assistant on...
Tag this Judgment!Akbar Ali Vs. Ali Mohammed
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-26-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)133
J.P. Jain, J.1. This second appeal is by defendant Akbar Ali against whom a decree for eviction from the suit has been passed by both the courts below. The facts of the case are these.2. Akbar Ali is the tenant of the suit house since 16.5.63 at the rate of Rs. 51/- per month. Ali Mohammed, the owner of the house served quit notice on Akbar Ali calling upon him to surrender vacant possession of the house as he wanted the same for his own use. The tenant having failed to surrender possession, Ali Mohammed sued Akbar Ali for eviction and for arrears of rent. The suit was tried by Additional Munsif Court No. 2, Udaipur The grounds on which the eviction was sought were two fold: one that the defendant had not paid the rent from 16.12.1969 to 16.7.70 i e. for a period of seven months and as such he was a defaulter. The second ground was that the plaintiff required the suit house for personal necessity.3. The suit was resisted by the defendant-tenant. After trial the learned trial Judge acce...
Tag this Judgment!Kamalu DIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-24-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN80
M.L. Shrimal, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated September 26, 1973 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City whereby he acquitted the appellant under Section 302/199 IPC, but convicted him under Section 314, Para 1, IPC, and sentenced him to seven year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default of the payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months.2. The prosecution story in nutshell is that Ram Khilari had two sons Radheysham and Ghanshyam. Radheyshyam was married to Smt. Mahadevi, and his younger brother Ghanshyam was married to Smt. Sri Bai. It is alleged that prior to the marriage of Smt. Mahadevi she was in illicit intimacy with Gajanaod (since acquitted) as a result of which she became pregnant Radhey Shyam later on came to know of this fact and as such he refused to bring her back fro en his father it law's place. A few days prior to the abortion Gaja Nand and Kalyan conspired to rel...
Tag this Judgment!Fakira and anr. Vs. Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Raj208; 1975()WLN64
P.N. Shinghal, C.J.1. This petition for a writ of certiorari is directed against the appellate judgment Ex. F of the Board of Revenue dated November 8, 1967, by which the petitioners' first appeal has been dismissed on the ground that it had abated on the death of Aladin who was one of the co-appellants,2. The suit giving rise to the impugned judgment was instituted in the court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ratangarh, for the ejectment of Fakira, Aladin and Ladu as trespassers. It was dismissed by judgment Ex. D of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated June 24, 1963. The plaintiffs filed an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority. It was alowed by judgment Ex. E dated May 14, 1964, and the suit was decreed for ejectment of the defendants from the suit land. All the three defendants Fakira, Aladin and Ladu filed a second appeal to the Board of Revenue. Aladin died on April 15, 1966, during the pendency of the appeal, and his name was struck off from the array of the appellants on an a...
Tag this Judgment!Parmeshwari Devi Vs. Mahavir Prasad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)131
J.P. Jain, J.1. This is an appeal by Parmeshwari Devi against whom a decree for judicial separation has been passed by the Additional District Judge Churu, on 11.9.1971 at the instance of her husband, Mahavir Prasad The parties were married on 16.4.63 at Churu It appears from the very beginning some unpleasantness developed between them However, they continued to live together (sic) 1966 Parmeshwari Devi left her marital home on 15-10-1966, It is admitted between the parties that after that she did not return to her husband house' nor did she resume her marital obligations towards her husband. Mahavir Prased submitted a petition for judicial separation on 18.7.70 on the allegation that Parmeshwari Devi has deserted him for more that two veers prior to the filing of the petition This petition was resisted by Parmeshwari Devi, In her written statement she alleged that she was always ready and willing to go to her husband house But the is treated cruelly and tales allegations against her ...
Tag this Judgment!Bherulal Vs. the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Raj206
ORDERC.M. Lodha, J.1. This writ application raises an important question viz. whether the first proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 45 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Act No. 4 of 1939) (which will hereinafter be referred to as 'the Act'), applies to the case of an application for a temporary permit also. It reads as under :'45. General provision as to applications for permits : (1) Every application for a permit shall be made to the Regional Transport Authority of the region in which it is proposed to use the vehicle or vehicles :Provided that if it is proposed to use the vehicle or vehicles in two or more regions lying within the same State, the application shall be made to the Regional Transport Authority of the region in which the major portion of the proposed route or area lies, and in case the portion of the proposed route or area in each of the regions is approximately equal, to the Regional Transport Authority of the region in which it is proposed to keep the vehicle or vehi...
Tag this Judgment!Bheru Lal Vs. the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN90
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This writ application raises an important question viz. whether the first proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 45 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Act No. 4 of 1939) (which will hereinafter be refined to as 'the Act'), applies to the case of an application for a temporary permit also. It reads as under:45 General provision as to applications for permits : (1) Every application for a permit shall be made to the Regional Transport Authority of the region in which it is proposed to use the vehicles:Provided that if it is proposed to use the vehicle or vehicles in two or more regions lying within the same State, the application shall be made to the Regional Transport Authority of the region in which the major portion of the proposed route or area lies, and in case the portion of the proposed route or area in each of the regions is approximately equal, to the Regional Transport Authority of the region in which it is proposed to keep the vehicle or vehicles.2. The question ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mohini Bai Vs. Kishanchand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)98
J.P. Jain, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and it arises in the following circumstances:2. Plaintiff Smt. Mohani Bai obtained a decree against one Aildas for ejectment from the house hearing No. AMC. 6/428 Old & 7/414 New on the ground of personal necesslty. Appeal by Alidas failed. His second appeal in the High Court was also dismissed on 7-5-68. During the pendency of the appeals the execution was stayed at the instance of Aildas. In execution Mohini Bai obtained an order of forcible dispossession on 8.5.68 Kishan Chand respondent, who is the nephew of Aildas, resisted the execution of the recovery of possession and maintained that be was the tenant of Mohini Bai as she has admitted him as the tenant on and from 7.5.68. The matter had gone upto the High Court and as a result of the litigation Smt. Mohini Bai have to file a fresh suit for recovery of possession of the suit property, on the basis of title. The Civil Suit was registered as 124/1970.3. Kishan Chand in his written state...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »