Rajasthan Court January 1979 Judgments
Raju Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1979
Reported in: 1980CriLJ896
ORDERS.N. Deedwania, J.1. This revision in preferred against the order dated 21-8-1974 of learned Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner, dismissing the petitioner's application for revoking the order of taking cognizance dated 16-7-1973, against him under Section 304A, I.P.C.2. The facts briefly stated are these: that in a case under Section 304A, I.P.C. the police presented a final report before the Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner. The learned Magistrate disagreeing with the opinion of the S. H. O. took cognizance of the offence under Section 304A, I.P.C. against the accused-petitioner, on 16-7-63 who, thereafter, presented an application that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of offence under the Cr.P.C. 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the new Code) and therefore, the order should be revoked. The learned Magistrate rejected this application of the accused-petitioner while holding that even under the new Code, he has the power and jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offenc...
Tag this Judgment!Lal Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN30
M.L. Shrimal, J.1. Accused Lal Singh was tried by learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer for offences under Sections 304 and 323 I.P.C. In the course of the occurrence having taken place at 5 p.m. on October 22, 1972. Ratan Singh, a child of six months, is alleged to have sustained injuries at the hands of Lal Singh, as a result thereof he died. His mother Mst. Rami also sustained some injuries in the same occurrence. The defence case is that Mst. Rami was carrying her child, Ratan Singh, on her shoulder. While coming out of the house Mst. Rami struck against the threshold of the door of her dwelling house and fell on the steps as a result whereof Ratan Singh and Mst. Rami both sustained injuries. Learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer by her judgment dated October 30, 1973, held that the injuries received by Mst. Rami and Ratan Singh were not by the result of a fall on the steps, but they were tragically linked with lathi blows, indicted by accused Lal Singh and consequently Ratan Singh succumbed to th...
Tag this Judgment!Harjiram and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN105
M.C. Jain, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, CrPC, by Harji Ram, Bhanwarsingh, Mansharam and kirtaram against the order of the learned sessions Judge. Churu, dated 5-10-1978 whereby process was ordered to be issued against the applicants in the case committed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Churu, for trial to the court of Sessions.2. In order to appreciate the controversy in the present application, it would be proper to take notice of some material facts. The prosecution case is, that there was enmity between the complainant party and the accused party in connection with the land in dispute. The complaint Bhinwaram along with his brother's wife Gaura and two sons Jetharam and Jagguram were living in their field aid for some time past his brother Gyanaram, Gumanaram and Gyanaram's wife Mst. Shanti were also living there. It is said that the accused persons armed with weapons, entered into the field of the complainant on the night intervening 16-6-78 and 17-3-78 and assa...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Dhapoobai and ors. Vs. Narainlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)137
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This is defendants' second appeal under Section 100 CPC directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional Civil judge, Udaipur dated November 29, 1978 by which he reversed the judgment and decree dated October 20, 1976 passed by the Munsiff, Udaipur. 2 The plaintiff (tenant) instituted a suit on September 10, 1971 against she defendants (Landlords) who are the legal representatives of Bhaironlal original landlord for possession in respect of a shop from which he was alleged to have been illegally dispossessed on June 16, 1969. The case of the plaintiff was that he was tenant-in-possession of a shop situate at Moti Chohatta at Udaipur on a monthly rent of Rs. 12/- per month and that the landlord disposses him by throwing out his goods. As he was not able to obtain possession though he initiated proceedings under Section 144, CrPC he instituted the suit for getting back its possession. He also prayed that goods mentioned in Schedules A and B may also ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Tejmal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1979
Reported in: 1980CriLJ779
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. Against the judgment of acquittal dated July 14, 1977 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara, the State of Rajasthan has preferred this appeal for securing the conviction of the accused-respondent under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (No. XXXVII of 1954) (for short 'the Act' hereafter).2. The Food Inspector, Municipal Area, Bhilwara filed a complaint on August 31, 1970 against the accused under Section 16(1) of the Act. According to the prosecution, the accused was carrying on his business in a shop situate inside Sarkari Darwaja, Sadar Bazar, Bhilwara under the name and style of swastik Masala Bhandar. On June 8, 1970, at 5 p. m., the Food Inspector Sardarsingh went there and purchased 450 grams chillies powder from the accused at a price of Rs. 2.70. The accused was duly informed vide Ex. P1 (Form No. VI) that the chillies powder was being purchased for the purpose of getting it analysed. The chillies powder, purchased from the...
Tag this Judgment!Harchand and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN88
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is aimed at over setting the judgment dated February 9, 1970, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court by which he dismissed the petitioner Harchand's petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal may briefly be recounted as under: Petitioner Harchand submitted a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing and setting aside of the order (Ex. A) dated October 5, 1967, passed by Shri Brij Sunder Sharma, Revenue Minister of Rajasthan (hereafter 'the then Revenue Minister'), while exercising his power of review under Section 85A of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 ('the Act' hereafter). Petitioner Harchand died during the pendency of the appeal and as such his legal re preventatives were ordered to be brought on record on April 5, 1971. Before the learned Single Judge, it was a common ground b...
Tag this Judgment!Kewal Chand Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-23-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)49
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. The petitioner, in these two writ petitions is the Holder of as age-carriage, permit for operating his bus on the Pali-Ahore 'route. He has' challenged the order dated 17th August, 1978, passed by the State Transport' Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal') whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeals of Narpatraj (respondent No. 3 in Civil Writ Petition No. 631 of 1978) and Premraj (respondent No,3 in Civil Writ Petition No. 67a of 1978 and has directed the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur to grant non-temporary permits for a period of three years to the said respondents on the Pali-Ahore route.2. Originally the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'RTA') by its resolution dated October 21-22, 1964, had granted four non-temporary permits on the Pali-Ahor route Out of those four permits, only two persons viz Jaisingh and Doongarsingh got their permits renewed and in 1968 only two persons were having non-temp...
Tag this Judgment!Basti Ram Vs. Ghewarchand and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Raj148; 1979()WLN51
M.C. Jain, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 5-10-1967 of the District Judge, Balotra, whereby he decreed the plaintiffs' suit in toto.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated as under:The plaintiff-respondents instituted a suit against the three defendants Bastiram, and his two sons Bhanwara and Ghewarchand with the allegations that the defendant No. 1 Basti Ram executed a pronote and a receipt in favour of the plaintiffs on Phalgun Sudi 8, 2019 corresponding to 3-3-1963 for a sum of Rs. 2,101/- after acknowledging the balance of past loan and stipulated to pay interest @ 12% per annum. The plaintiffs sued for Rs. 2,101/- as principal and Rs. 749/- on account of interest, total Rs. 2,850/-.3. It may be stated that the suit against Bhanwara and Ghewarchand stands dismissed and it is only defendant No. 1 Bastiram, who is at present contesting. Bastiram submitted his written statement in which he admitted the execution of ...
Tag this Judgment!Harisingh Vs. the State of Raj and Two ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)30
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, Harisingh, has challenged the order dated 19th June, 1976 passed by the Government of Rajasthan in exercise of the powers conferred on it by Section 15 (2) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Ceiling Act').2. The petitioner holds certain lands in village Hariyadana, Tehsil Bilara, District Jodhpur Proceedings for determination of surpuls land in excess of the ceiling area were started against the petitioner by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jodhpur under the provisions of Chapter III-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. In the said proceedings, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jodhpur, passed an order dated 8th June, 1971 whereby he held that the petitioner was not in possession of land in excess of the ceiling area applicable to village Hariyadana and the said proceedings were dropped. In 1973, the Ceiling Act was enacted and ...
Tag this Judgment!Sajjansingh Vs. the State of Raj. and Two ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)32
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Sajjansingh, who is an Ex-Jagirdar of Jagir Bagri. has challenged the order dated 5th July, 1978, passed by the Government of Rajasthan, whereby, in exercise of the powers conferred on it tinder Section 15(2) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Ceiling Act'), the State Government directed the Additional Collector, Pali, to reopen the case relating to determination of the surplus land in excess of the ceiling area held by the petitioner and to redetermine the said matter2. The facts, briefly stated, are that after the resumption of the jagir of the petition in the year 1954, the petitioner, his son Bhawani Singh and his daughter Rajerdra Kumari were holding certain lands in their own names. By the Rajasthan Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1960, the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, hereinafter referred to as the 'Tenanc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »