Rajasthan Court October 1977 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.
Jiwat Ram and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ693; 1977()WLN621
ORDERP.D. Kudal, J.1. These are two petitions Under Section 482, Cr.PC 1973. As both these petitions arise out of the same incident, they are being disposed of by this single order.2. The brief facts of the case which are relevant for the disposal of these applications are that Jiwat Ram is alleged to have been illegally detained from 14th June to 18 June, 1977 at the Police Station Gang, Ajmer by the SHO, Shri K. S. Jain, It is said that Smt. Jassi wife of Jiwat Ram sent telegrams to the Gover-Bor, Chief Secretary and Home Commissioner Rajasthan complaining about this illegal detention. A similar telegram is reported to have been sent to the Home Minister, Government of India, New Delhi. It is said that on Aug. 26, 1977, the police constable Satya Narain Pareek went to the house of Jiwat Ram and inquired about him. As Jiwat Ram was not at his house, the Police Constable directed Smt. Jassi wife of Jiwat Ram to send Jiwat Ram to the office of the Superintendent of Police, Ajmer the nex...
NaraIn Ram Vs. Shanker Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN510
K.D. Sharma, J.1. This is an application-in-revision filed by Narain Ram against an order of the Executive Magistrate, Nagaur, dated 9th December, 1976, by which western portion of Khasra No. 32 measuring 12 Bighas and 10 Biswas and situated in village Panchori was attached under sub-Section (1) of Section 146, Cr. P.C. and the Station House Officer, Panchori, was directed to take the land into his possession and the parties to get their respective claims decided by a competent court.2. The brief facts giving rise to this revision-application may be stated as follows: Shanker Lal hereinafter referred to as party No. 1, presented an application under Section 145, Cr. P.C. in the court of the Executive Magistrate, Nagaur, on 20th July, 1976. It was alleged in the application that half of the agricultural land comprised in Khasra No. 32 and situated in village Panchori is in joint possession of the applicant and his mother Mst. Jamna and the other half belongs to Rugha Ram's son Narain Ra...
Bhanwar Lal Vs. the Collector, Jodhpur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN577
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the Panchayat Samiti, Osian, proceeded to cancel the lease of a plot of land given in his favour by the Gram Panchayat, Osian, without affording the petitioner an opportunity of heating The facts which have given rise to this writ petition may be briefly stated. 2. The Gram Panchayat, Osian granted a lease of a plot of land situated near Gandhi Park in village Osian to the petitioner on a monthly rent of Rs. 45/-by its resolution dated April 4, 1976. The petitioner thereafter set up a temporary structure and started selling eatables at the aforesaid place The Panchayat Samiti, Osian by its order dated May 12, 1976 set aside the resolution of the Gram Panchayat granting the lease of the aforesaid plot of lend in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner thereupon submitted a revision petition under Section 27A of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Collector...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Shanker Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-1977
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)94
S.S. Byas, J.1. Accused Shanker Lal was convicted under Sections 279 and 337, IPC and Section 118A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 20/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo seven days' simple imprisonment on each count by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara by his judgment dated April 7, 1977. The State has come-up in appeal for the enhancement of the sentence.2. We have heard the learned Public Prosecutor. The accused-respondent, despite service of notice, did not put appearance.3. The offence was committed long back on April 30, 1972 and the case was decided by the learned Magistrate on April 7, 1977. The appeal is being heard and disposed of in October, 1987. Looking to the long lapse of ten years, we are not inclined to enhance the sentence.4. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed....
Shiv Lal Vs. Mohanraj and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-03-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)462
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The learned Counsel for the decree-holder states that the decree-holder has not filed any application under Order XXI, Rule 97 Code of Civil Procedure and the application which was submitted by him on September 14, 1977, before the executing Court was in furtherance of the proceedings under Order XXI, Rule 34, Code of Civil Procedure. An application under Order XXI, Rule 97 Code of Civil Procedure is not maintainable on behalf of the objector Shivlal. It is undisputed that proceedings for determination of the question relating to the right title or interest in the property in dispute, under Rule 101 of Order XXI, Code of Civil Procedure, could only be initiated if an application either under Rule 99 of Order XXI, Code of Civil Procedure, is presented before the executing court. Under Order XXI, Rule 97, Code of Civil Procedure, an application complaining of resistance or obstruction to the delivery of possession by a third person can be presented only by the decree-hol...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›