Rajasthan Court October 1976 Judgments
Vijaysingh Kalyansingh Vs. R.T.A. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-26-1976
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)453
M.L. Joshi, J.1. This matter comes up for the disposal of the stay application. However, as the point involved it the Stay matter and the main petition befog the same it was taken for final disposal at the request of the parties.2. The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation hereinafter called the R.S.R.T.C. applied for temporary permits under Section 62 of the Motor Vehicles Act, hereinafter called the Act. An objection was raised on behalf of the petitioner to the grant of permits but despite the objection the permits were granted to the Corporation by its resolution dated 22nd of September, 1976. The petitioner has challenged this resolution by way of ac application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.3. The case of the petitioner as set out in the application Is that the petitioner was never heard on his objections and the same were decided by circulation without giving him reasonable opportunity of being beard; that the application under Section 62 of the Act does no...
Tag this Judgment!Devi Singh Vs. Authority Under Section 28a(2) of Rajasthan Shop and Co ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-26-1976
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)535
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The facts of this case are a few and simple. The petitioner was appointed by M/s Compton Greaves Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company') by a letter of appointment dated November 29, 1968, a copy of which has been placed on record as Ex 1 After serving the respondent No. 2 for some time, the petitioner cent his letter of resignation (Ex. 2) on March 17, 1975 stating therein that as per terms of his appointment, the said letter may be treated as one month's notice before the petitioner is released, from the service of the Company. The case of the petitioner is that before the expiry of the notice period of one month, he withdraw his resignation telegraphically on April 16, 1976, but the company thereafter intimated to the petitioner that his resignation was accepted by it. According to the petitioner he continued to remain in the service of the company and taking the view that hit services were unlawfully terminated by the Company, the petitioner filed an appl...
Tag this Judgment!Akhtar Ali Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-25-1976
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)574
D.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar convicting the appellant Akhtar Ali under Section 3 read with Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and also under Rule 3/6 of the Indian Passport Rules, 1950. Akhtar Ali was sentenced to undergo three years 'rigorous imprisonment under Section 3/14 of the Foreigners Act, while a sentence of three months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- was imposed upon him for the contravention of Rules 3/6 of the Indian Passport Rules and it was also ordered that in the absence of payment of fine, he shah undergo, further rigorous imprisonment for for. 20 days. It may be mentioned here that along with Akhtar Ali, another person Mohammed Shafi, was also similarly convicted and sentenced for committing offence under the I foreigners Act and Indian Passport Rules. However, the present appeal has been filed by Akhtar Ali alone.2. The prosecution case in brief is th...
Tag this Judgment!Banshidhar and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-21-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Raj46
V.P. Tyagi, Actg. C.J. 1. These 27 special appeals arise out of the judgment of the learned single Judge D/-22-12-1975 whereby the learned Judge has held that the proceedings commenced under Chapter III-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referredto as the 'old Law') for the determination of the ceiling and the surplus area of the land-holder shall even after the Rajasthan' Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (Act No. 11 of 1973) (hereinafter called the 'new Law.) came into force, be governed by the old Law and the new Law shall have no effect on such proceedings. Having felt aggrieved by this finding the landholders have preferred these appeals.2. In order to resolve the controversies raised in these appeals it will be relevant to give a short history of various laws enacted by the legislature from time to time for the fixation of ceiling on agricultural holdings. For the first time, the law was made in the State of Rajasthan by enacting the Rajastha...
Tag this Judgment!ChiraguddIn Vs. Nazir and 7 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-21-1976
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)577
S.N. Modi, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendant-appellant Chiraguddin against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Sikar, dated December 22, 1967.2. The following pedegree table will show the relationship between the parties:Haji Umar||-------------------------------------|------------------------------------|Hussain Allabeh Sandal| | (D-1)| | |Nazir | |------------|-------------|(Plaintiff No. 1) | Abdulla Kasim LukmanMukhtiar | (D-2) (D-3) (D-4)(Plaintiff No. 2) | || | || | |-----------------|| | |Chiraguddin Amin Gulab Nabi(D-5) (D-6) (D-7)3. The plaintiffs came with the case that the shop described in paragraph No. 2 of the plaint was the property of Haji Umar and the plaintiffs have got one-third share in it. They, therefore, prayed for partition of the shop amongst the descendants of Haji Umar. It was also pleaded that the disputed shop was let out to Allabeli on an annual rent of Rs. 20/-. The defendants Sandal, Abdulla, Kasim, Lukman, Amin and Guiam Nabi ...
Tag this Judgment!Daulat Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-20-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ560; 1976(9)WLN660
ORDERP.D. Kudal, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Criminal P.C. 1973, against the order dated April 28, 1976 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur in Criminal Misc. Case No. 35 of 1975.2. The facts of the case, in brief, which are relevant for the disposal of this application, are that a case under Section 9 of the Indian Opium Act was registered against the accused-applicant and others. During investigation the sample of the opium was sent to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur. In the report dated October 4, 1975, the Director reported that on chemical examination the sample contained in the packet was not found to be of opium. The investigating agency, therefore, submitted a final report under Section 173, Criminal P.C. 1973. The proceedings before the learned Magistrate dated April 8, 1976 reveal that the final report under Section 173, Criminal P.C. 1973 was presented and the case was posted for orders for April 22, 1976. On April 22, 1976, ...
Tag this Judgment!Hans Raj Vs. Superintending Engineer, Pwd
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-1976
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)463
S.N. Modi, J.1. This Is an appeal under Section 30(1)(a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act against the judgment of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Bikaner, dated December 31, 1971, whereby he disallowed claim of the appellant.2. Ramesh Kumar was working as an overseer P.W.D. (B & R), Sub-division No. V, Sri Dungargarh. His monthly wages, during the relevant period, were Rs. 404/-. He met with an accident en May 13, 1969 when he was traveling in a Government truck bearing registration No. RJK 4376.Ramesh Kumar was transporting a Government generator in she truck. The generator was leaded in truck at Dungargarh and in was to be deposited at Bikaner P.W.D. Office. This truck met with an accident in the course of journey resulting in death of Ramesh Kumar in the Government hospital, Bikaner on May 19, 1969 The appellant, who is the father of Ramesh Kumar, moved in application (sic) compensation to the tune of Rs. 10.000/- on the ground that Ramesh Kumar at the time of accident was...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Azad Bakery and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-19-1976
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)539
A.P. Sen, J.1. These four reference applications filed by the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Ward 'C' Ajmer raise a common question and therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. The non-petitioners to each of these cases is a bakery engaged in manufacturing and selling breads and biscuits and their turnover exceeds Rs. 6,000/- but is less than Rs. 15,000/-.3. According to the Revenue, these dealers fell within Section 3(1)(a) end not under Section 3(1)(c) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. The relevant portion of Section 3(1) as it steed at the relevant time, is as follows:3. Incidence of taxation - (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, every dealer whose turnover in the previous year in respect of sales or supplies of goods exceeds-(a) in the case of a dealer who imports goods, of manufactures any goods other than cooked food (or deals in cereals and pulses in any of their forms), Rs. 5,000/-.(b) .... (c) in the case of a dealer not falling in Clause (...
Tag this Judgment!Manohari Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1976
Reported in: 1976WLN745
P.D. Kudal, J.1. This is an application by the accused applicant Manohari under Section 482, Cr.P.C., 1973 against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Bharatpur dated September 13, 1976.2. The facts of the case, in brief, which are relevant for the disposal of this application, are that a case under Rules 33, 43, 46 & 48 of the Defence of India Rules, 1971 was registered against the accused-applicant. The learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Bayana released the petitioner on bail on June 28, 1976 on his furnishing a personal bond for Rs. 5,000/- and a surety in the like amount. The learned Public Prosecutor after a lanes of about 3 months moved an application under Section 439(a). Cr.P.C., 1973 before the learned Sessions Judge, Bharatpur praying that the bail granted by the learned Magistrate may be cancelled. The learned Sessions Judge by his order dated September 13, 1976 cancelled the bail, which was granted to the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. It is against this or...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. V.K. Bhatia and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1976
Reported in: (1977)ILLJ245Raj; 1976(9)WLN488
M.L. Jain, J.1. This judgment will dispose of the above mentioned seven cases.2. Shri K.K. Bhatia an Assistant Engineer in the Rajasthan Ground Water Board filed a S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 329 of 1971. He was appointed on ad hoc and temporary basis as an Assistant Engineer in the Rajasthan Ground Water Board by the Government of Rajasthan, Agricultural Department Order dated 16th January, 1967. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission (hereinafter called the Commission) issued an advertisement on 12th June, 1970, inviting applications for the posts of 16 Assistant Engineers in accordance with the Rajasthan Ground Water Board Service Rules, 196J. The petitioner also applied and appeared before the Commission on 3-2-1971 for interview. The Commission made the selections but he was not selected. He challenged the selections on the ground that all the members of the Commission did not participate in any of the sittings of the Commission and the interview was taken only by the Chairman a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »