Rajasthan Court July 1978 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.
Mohanlal Rathi Vs. Hind Stores
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)217
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This revision application has been preferred by the plaintiff against the order of the leaned Additional civil Judge dated July 15, 1978 by which his application dated December 16, 1976 under Section 151 Order VII Rule 18 and Order XIII Rule 2 CPC, was dismissed2. The plaintiff-petitioner instituted a suit against the defendant non-petitioner for the recovery of Rs. 5000/- on August 8, 1967. The defendant contested the suit vide written statement dated December 18, 1967. The claim of the plaintiff-petitioner was dented. The defendant-non-petitioner preferred a counter claim for Rs. 3200/- consisting of Rs. 303165 as the principal and Rs. 168.35 (sic) account of interest according to mercantile usage The trial court framed issues on Sept, 9, 1969. Issue No. 4 related to courier claim. The burden of some of the issues, was on he plaintiff and in respect of some issues, the burden was placed on the defendant. It may be mentioned that the burden of issue No. 4 was on t...
Gumana Ram Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)285
R.L. Gupta, J.1. Birbal Ram, Gumana Ram along with Pooran were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bikaner for causing the murder of one Mana Ram Pooran was charged for the offence under Section 109 and 302 I.P.C. but he was acquitted of the charges. Birbal Ram was convicted for the offence under Section 304, Part II, I.P.C. and Gumana Ram for the offence under Section 304-Part II read with Section 34, I.P.C.. Both were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years vide Judgment dated 27.9.1975. Aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, this appeal bad been preferred by them.2. It is alleged by the prosecution that when Likhma Ram PW1 was gracing his 'rewar' (herd of sheep) the deceased Mana Ram was also grazing his rewar, nearby. Manaram is the younger brother of Rewatram. The appellant Gumana ram came there and told Manaram that his brother (Rewatram) has changed his 30 sheep so he had to leave the job of grazing the 'rewar' of Rewatram Mararam, in turn asked him no...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Sardar Singhji Jagirdar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)207
M.L. Joshi, J.1. The only point raised in this writ petition is that whether it is open to the Jagir Commissioner to recognise property to be the personal property of the Jagirdar even if the Jagirdar has failed to file a list of his private properties as provided under Section 23 read with Rules 21 and 22 of the Rajasthan Land Reform and Resumption of Jagir Rules 1954, hereinafter called the Rules.2. The Jagir Uniara was resumed on 16th of June, 1954, by issuance of a notification by the State Government under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Jagir Resumption Act, 1952, hereinafter called the Act. It it not disputed that the Respondent No. 1 had submitted a list of properties on June 17, 1954 The Jagir Commissioner had also decided the matter pertaining to the list of personal properties of the said Jagirdar on 2nd of November, 1962 Being aggrieved against the order of the Jagir Commissioner an appeal was filed before the Board of Revenue. During the course of arguments it...
Ram Narayan Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-04-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)185
M.C. Jain, J.1. This special appeal Under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance is directed against the order of the Single judge of this Court dated 21-2-1969 passed in S.B. Civil writ petition No. 1205 of 1964, whereby the learned Single judge quashed acquisition proceedings subject to certain reservations.2. The facts may be recalled in brief : The present appellant and his brother Birbal Singh claimed to be the 'Khatedars' of agricultural land in dispute, which were recorded in their name in their joint 'Khata'. The acquisition proceedings in respect of the disputed lands were initialed and necessary notification Under Sections 4, 5(2) and 6 of the Rajasthan land Acquisition Act 1953, were issued in respect of which it was averred that the writ petitioners have no knowledge. In the acquisition proceeding the Land Acquisition Officer gave two awards on 28-11-59. In the writ petition the validity of the notification issued Under Section 4 and 5(2) of the aforesaid Act and ...
Chunnilal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-04-1978
Reported in: 1978WLN(UC)230
D.P. Gupta, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the recovery sought to be made from him in respect of the contract for retail sale of country liquor pertaining to the year 1971-72 and has played that the demand raised against him for a sum of Rs. 4723.52 p. by the District Excise Officer, Udaipur vide his notice dated June 15, 1974 be quashed.2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner obtained a licence for sale of country liquor for the year 1971-72, under the provisions of the Rajasthan Excise Act 1950 & the Rajasthan Excise Rules 1956, under what is known as the guarantee system and he could not lift the liquor to the full extent as per the terms of his contract. The petitions case is that he was unable to lift the liquor for the guaranteed amount as adequate stocks of liquor was not available in the warehouse and the respondents were not in a position to supply liquor as demanded by the petitioner and that inspite of the fact that the petitioner was willing to...
Purshottam Lal Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Raj18
ORDERM.L. Jain, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of Quo Warranto under Article 226 of the Constitution directed mainly against respondent No. 4, Shri Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, at present the Chief Minister of Rajasthan. The petitioner prays for some other consequential reliefs as well. In the array of respondents, the petitioner also included the Governor of the State of Rajasthan,2. The petitioner describes himself an elector registered in the Hawa Mahal Assembly Constituency of Jaipur and the General Secretary of the Pradesh Yuvak Congress Committee, Rajasthan. He alleges that the name of the respondent No. 4 stands entered in the electoral roll of the Kishanpole Assembly Constituency of Jaipur right from the year 1966 down to the year 1975-77. However, In the year 1974, he made an application on Feb. 18, 1974, before the Electoral Registration Officer of the Govindpura Constituency. District Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, for inclusion of his name in the electoral roll of the said Constit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›