Rajasthan Court October 1977 Judgments
Ram Gopal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-27-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN579
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as a Field man in the Agriculture Department of the State of Rajasthan on March 19, 1960. By the order of the Agricultural Chemist, Rajasthan, dated March 3, 1964 the petitioner's post of Field man WAS converted into one of a Lower Division (sic) in the same grade and on the same emoluments. The petitioner joined hi duties as a Lower Division Clerk on April 1, 1964. Thereafter he appeared at the recruitment examination held for the posts of Lower Division Clerks and was successful. As a result thereof, he was confirmed as a Lower Division Clerk with effect from January 9, 1965 by the order issued on September 20, 1966 and a fresh order of confirmation of the petitioner was issued on 26th September, 1972 although the date of his confirmation remaned unchanged. The petitioner was subsequent]} promoted as an Upper Division Clerk with effect from April 1, 1968 and was confirmed in the said post with effect from April 1, 1970 by the or...
Tag this Judgment!Nemi Chand and Bhanwarlal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-26-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN513
M.L. Jain, J.1. Both these petitions, namely, Nos. 1126/1972 and 1117/1972 raise common questions of law, and shall be disposed of by this common order.2. The facts of the writ petition No. 1126/1972 are that the petitioner despatched 1115.4 metric tonnes of stone from the Railway Station, Tinwari, District Jodhpur. The Mines Department of the State Govt. found that the petitioner had excavated the said stone during the period from 26-2-66 to 3 12 69. It proceeded to issue a notice on 17-9-70 to the petitioner that the mineral was excavated without any lease, licence or permit and directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 1951 26 p. against royalty amount within a period of 7 days. It was also said that on failure to so deposit the amount, recovery proceedings under the Land Revenue Act, 1956, will be taken. In reply to the notice, the petitioner stated that he had purchased stone from the market at Jodhpur from where he brought it to Tinwari and despatched. He was not therefore,...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Danmal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-26-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN645
S.N. Modi, J.1. This is a special appeal under section. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance filed on behalf of the State, of Rajasthan against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated October 13, 1969 in S.B. Civil Writ petition No. 535 of, 1966 quashing the order dated September 7, 1960 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur Range, Jodhpur dismissing the respondent from service.2. The respondent Danmal, a Head Constable of police, was working as Account Clerk in police lines at Pali. On complaints of bribery and misappropriation, the Superintendent of Police on February 9, 1953 went to the police lines for physical checking of the cash balance in the hand of the respondent Danmal According to the department, the respondent in 1st instance showed his willingness to unlock the cash box for checking, but soon-after changed his mind and avoided the checking of the cash on ground that he left the key of the cash box at his residence. The Superint...
Tag this Judgment!Umed Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-25-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)423
D.P. Gupta, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has chalneged the order of the State Government dated August 29, 1977, published in the Rajasthan Gazette, dated September 28, 1977 by which it was declared that the area comprised in village Rani Khurd ceased to be a Municipality. The case of the petitioner is that the order issued by the State Government does not show as to whether the re presentations submitted by the petitioner and other inhabitants of the locality were considered and decided by the State Government before issuing the notification declaring that the area comprised in village Rani Khurd ceased to be a Municipality. The case of the petitioner is that initially a Gram Panchayat was constituted in respect of the village Rani Khurd, but by the Notification dated September 4, 1975 the State Gove, had created a Municipal Board in respect of the local area comprised in the aforesaid village Rani Khurd. Thereafter another Notification was issued on March 8, 1977 proposin...
Tag this Judgment!Sohan Lal Vs. Ram Dayal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-25-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN549
S.N. Modi, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree of the District Judge. Bhilwara dated March 30, 1977 affirming the judgment and decree of the Munsif, Bhilwara.2. The plaintiff respondents came with the case that the shop in dispute was originally owned by one Kajore who mortgaged it with Gulam Abbas on 12-11-56. The defendant was inducted as a tenant of the shop by Gulam Abbas on a monthly rent of Rs. 30/-. Pyare Lal Khateek who was legal representative of deceased Kajore redeemed the mortgage on 18-1-1974. The plaintiff-respondents purchased the suit premises from Pyare Lal on 21.1.974 Gulam Abbas served a notice to the defendant informing him about the redemption of mortgage and sale of property in favour of the plaintiff-respondents vide registered notice dated 21-8-1974. The plaintiffs also served a notice to the defendant determining the tenancy. When the defendant appellant did not vacate the shop inspite of the notice, the plaintiff-respondents...
Tag this Judgment!Sataya NaraIn Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)524
Mohan Lal Shrimal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. In case No. 706 of 1977 pending in the Court of Munsif arid Judicial Magistrate, Beawer the accused petitioners were ordered to be released on bail on furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- each and six sureties of Rs. 50,000/- for each of the accused.3. Being aggrieved of the above referred order dated August 5, 1977 the petitioners went up in revision before the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer, who by his order dated August 20, 1977 partly accepted the revision and modified the impunged order as under:Satya Narain, Vinod Kumar and Vijai Kumar were ordered to furnish personal bonds h; the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each and two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each The accused Satya Narain son of Shri Lakhan Lal and Bhanwar Lal were ordered to furnish personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each and two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/-each.4. Though the accused-petitioner have furnished the personal bonds and the s...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Rajasthan Vs. Gyandeo and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN559
V.P. Tyagi, C.J.1. This is a State appeal against the order of acquittal of Gyandeo and Rishideo for a charge under Section 302 I.P.C. for committing the murder of Megsingh. This judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Ganganagar is dated 3011-1970.2. The prosecution story as revealed by the prosecution witnesses is like this Wife of Gyandeo accused (sic with some body and it was suspected by Gyanandeo that Megsingh was in the know of the whereabouts of his wife. Megsingh was therefore sent for to village 16BB by Gyandeo from Ganganagar. It is said that pursuant to the call Megsingh came on March 22, 1970 by a bus to 16BB and from the bus stand he was seen going to the house of Gyandeo. At the time when Megsingh reached Gyandeo's house. Gyandeo was not there as he had gone to meet his younger son to Ganganagar. In the evening Gyandeo returned from Ganganagar and he found that his son Rishideo another accused in this case and Surender kept Megsingh closed in a room On a...
Tag this Judgment!JainaraIn Jeevraj Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (No. 1)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-18-1977
Reported in: [1980]121ITR353(Raj); 1977()WLN546
V.P. Tyagi, C.J.1. This is an application made by the assessee, M/s. Jainarain Jeevraj, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), praying for issuing a direction to the Tribunal to refer the questions mentioned in the application to this court for its answer.2. This matter relates to the assessment year 1964-65. At the time of the assessment of the petitioner-firm, the ITO added Rs. 36,000 as an income from undisclosed sources. Against that assessment order an appeal was preferred before the AAC and there the assessee tried to explain that the entry made on September 14, 1962, depositing Rs. 36,000 in the cash book was a bogus entry, because it was made by a 'munim' without having the knowledge of certain facts. According to the assessee, on September 11, 1962, an amount of Rs. 36.000 was withdrawn from the current account of the bank, but the same amount was deposited in a fixed deposit for one month. This fact was not in the knowledge of...
Tag this Judgment!Bhika Lal Vs. Ratia
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-18-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)484
S.N. Modi, J.1. This is a revision application by the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money on the basis of a promissory note accompanied with a receipt. Both the courts below have dismissed the suit on the ground that the promissory note and the receipt have been materially altered and as such they are void and inadmissible in evidence under Section 87 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.2. The plaintiff came with the case that the defendant Ratia was the 'Karta' of the Joint Hindu Family consisting of himself and his sons Rama, Chela and Sakia and that the defendant Ratia borrowed a sum of Rs. 501/- from the plaintiff and executed promissory note and receipt on April 23, 1969. It was also alleged by the plaintiff that though in the promissory note as well as in the receipt the names of the sons of Fatia were mentioned but both these documents were executed by the defendant Ratia alone. The defendant Ratia in his statement denied both the execution as well as consideration. He also ...
Tag this Judgment!Karam Chand Vs. Revenue Appellate Authority and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-18-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)390
M.L. Jain, J.1. The facts are that the village Panchayat, Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar, allotted a plot of land, measuring 6,300 Sq ft. in dispute on 11.8.59 to the petitioner, Karam Chand on a rent of Rs. 100/- per year for raising a dairy farm. One of the conditions of allotment was that if the petitioner did not put up the dairy farm and utilised, the land for some other purpose, then the allotment was liable to cancellation. The petitioner instead of putting up a dairy farm installed a saw machine. A notice on 21.4.60 was issued to the petitioner Karam Chand. He refused to offer any explanation for contravention of the condition and challenged the Panchayat to do whatever it liked. The Panchayat cancelled the allotment of land on 1.5.60. The Panchayat also held that he had created nuisance and obstruction, and there fore, also imposed a fine of Rs. 15/- and directed that the petitioner shall pay a fine of a rupee a day a long as his disobedience of its direction continued.2. T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »