Rajasthan Court January 1979 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.
Smt. Geeta Devi and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-10-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)19
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated, 19th December, 1975 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pali in Ceiling Case No. 334 of 1975 and the order dated 31st March, 1976, passed by the Addl. Collector, Pali in Ceiling Appeal, No. 46 of 1976: The facts related to the filing of the writ petition are briefly, as under:2. The petitioners are the daughters of the Rama Kishan and respondents Nos. 4 and 5 are the sons of the said Rama Kishan, whereas respondent No. 6 is the wife of Rama Kishan, Rama Kishan died on 18th September, 1959. At the time of his death 36 bighas and- 19 biswas of land in Khasra No. 85 was entered in the revenue records in the name of Rama Kishan and 550 bighas of land in Khasara Nos. 74,81, 86 87 add 89 were entered in the names of his sons. Pukhraj and Anandraj, respondents Nos. 4 and 5. The case of the petitioners is th...
Manzoor Ahmed Vs. Regional Transport Authority, Kota and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Raj98; 1979()WLN311
ORDERG.M. Lodha, J. 1. This writ petition should fail as it fails to satisfy the prerequisite condition of 'Substantial Injury' or 'Substantial failure of justice' to petitioner under Article 226(1)(b) and (c) of the Constitution. 2. The principal point raised by Mr. Mehta is that a temporary Bus permit has been granted to respondent No. 2, Madan Lal on Ramganj-Mandi Rawat-bhata route where an application for non-temporary permit is already pending. Mr. Mehta submits that it is well established law that a temporary permit cannot be granted on a route where applications for grant of non-temporary permits, were invited and the same are pending. 3. Mr. Mehta, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has further contended that the grant of permit is, therefore, without jurisdiction and illegal. 4. It was further submitted that the non-mention of temporary purpose in the application and the order also makes it illegal because no temporary permit can be granted for a regular service. 5. I may...
Sanwarmal Vs. Murarilal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Raj68
M.B. Sharma, J.1. This Civil Second Appeal by the defendant-tenant Sanwarmal involves a question of law regarding the ambit and scope of Section 13 (A) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The facts of the case and the events leading to the preference to the Division Bench are these.3. Two shops, fully described in para 2 of the plaint, were let out by Murarilal plaintiff-respondent under a rent note dated March 10, 1958 to defendant-appellant Sanwarmal on a monthly rent of Rs. 19/-. The plaintiff Murarilal and the defendant Sanwarmal shall hereinafter be referred to as the plaintiff and defendant respectively.4. A suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent for the period commencing from July 6, 1966 to Nov. 6, 1968 amounting to Rs. 551/- and for notice expenses was filed by the plaintiff against the defendant in the Court of Munsif, Sikar on two grounds; firstly, that the plaintiff required the suit premises ...
Smt. Kishan Pyari Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Raj170; 1979()WLN76
ORDERS.K. Mal Lodha, J. 1. These two connected revisions before me involve a common question of law and, therefore, it will be convenient to dispose them of by a common order. 2. The petitioner is defendant-tenant and the non-petitioner is plaintiff-landlady. The plaintiff instituted a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment against the defendant in the court of Munsif City, Jodhpur on February 7, 1975 on the ground of reasonable and bona fide necessity under Section 13 (1) (h) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 ('the Act' hereafter). It is common ground between the parties that the shop was let out for commercial and business purposes. During the pendency of the suit, the Act was amended. By means of amendment subsections (2) and (3) were added by the amending Ordinance No. XXVI of 1975 with effect from September 29, 1975. Ordinance No. XXVI of 1975 was replaced by the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) (Amendment) Act. 1976 (No XIV of 1976) p...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Ganesh Mal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)10
M.C. Jain, J.1. This is a civil second appeal by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment and decree dated 6-9-1967 passed by the Civil Judge, Sojat, upholding the judgment and decree dated 31-7-1965 passed by the Munsif, Jaitaran, whereby the State of Rajasthan was restrained from effecting recovery of Rs. 990.72P. from the plaintiffs Ganesh Mal and Sohanlal.2. The plaintiffs' case, in brief, was that the plaintiffs were appointed agents for the storage and sales of food grains by the then Jodhpur Government under an agreement Ex. 1. The Government supplied 1540 'maunds wheat & 1,116 'maunds Gujji of the value of Rs. 31, 269/5/4. The plaintiffs were to be paid commission @ Rs. 1/10/- per maund. The Plaintiffs after deducting their commission amounting to Rs. 4, 316/- deposited the price of grain amounting to Rs. 26,953/5/4 in the Treasury through challans in two installments. When the commission bill was insisted by the Government, there was found a total shortage of Maunds 61.0 5 ...
Ashraf and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)1
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. This appeal has been filed under Section 410 of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 27th November, 1973 pissed by the Sessions judge, Bharatpur. in Sessions Case No. 36 of 1973 whereby all the appellants have been convicted under Section 325/149 IPG& Section 147 IP C. and appellants Ghosi, Sodan and Maman have been further convicted under Section 323 IP C. Appellant Ashina has been given the benefit of the provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, but the other appellants have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 500/- in respect of offence under Section 325/149 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year in respect of offence under Section 147 IPC Appellants Ghosi, Sodan and Mamman have been sentenced to 6 months' rigorous imprisonment in respect of offence under Section 323 I.P.C.2. In Sessions Case No. 36 of 1973, 10 persons i. e. appellants and four other persons viz Nijra, Dhoopa, Nuru ...
Doongarsingh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)17
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, Doongarsingh, has challenged the order dated 18th January, 1973, whereby he has been compulsorily retired from service. The petitioner joined the service of the former State of Jodhpur as Ameen Audit in the Jagir Settlement Department with effect from 1st February 19-48. The said, post of Ameen was a non-pensionable and temporary post The petitioner continued to work as an Ameen even after the formation of State of Rajasthan. The petitioner was appointed as Patwari with effect from 4th January, 1955 by order, dated 18th December, 1954 and he was confirmed on the post of Patwari by order dated 25th March, 1964 with effect from 4th January, 1955 By a notice dated 18th October, 1972,, issued under Rule 244 (2) of the Rajasthan Service Rules 1951, the petitioner was informed that he would-be completing 25 years of qualifying .service on .1,st February, 1973 and that the State Government was sat...
Ram Charanlal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Raj96
ORDERDwarka Prasad, .1. This revision application has been filed against the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Dholpur, dated Dec. 14, 1971. The facts of the case are briefly stated as under :2. Shyamlal, decrees-holder filed an execution application in the Court of Civil Judge, Dholpur, which was dismissed as time barred. An Execution First Appeal was filed by Shyamlal in the Court of District Judge, Bharatpur. The District Judge also dismissed the appeal as time barred but a further appeal to this Court was allowed and the first appeal was remanded to the learned District Judge for a decision thereof on merits after condoning the delay in filing the execution application. Before the remanded appeal could be disposed of by the learned District Judge, the appellant Shyamlal expired on May 8, 1966 leaving behind him his widow Smt. Champa Dei, three sons and a widow and sons of predeceased son, Kedar Nath. Shantilal, one of the sons of deceased decree-holder Shyamlal filed a...
Bhopal Singh and ors. Vs. Bhagwat Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Raj173; 1979()WLN24
ORDERS.K. Mal Lodha, J. 1. This application in revision by the defendants-petitioners has been filed against the order dated Aug. 1, 1977 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Pali, whereby he allowed the plaintiff-non-petitioner's application for amendment of the plaint. 2. The plaintiff-non-petitioner instituted a suit for cancellation of a sale-deed and possession in the Court of Munsif, Pali, on Feb. 22, 1968 against defendants Nos. 1 to 4 who are petitioners before me and defendant No. 5 who is the father of the plaintiff-non-petitioner. The case of the plaintiff as averred in the plaint is that his father during his minority without caring for his interest sold agricultural land bearing khasra No. 125 measuring 99 bighas 6 biswas situate in village Chatelav, Tehsil and District Pali by a registered sale-deed on Aug. 18, 1965, that the sale was made by his father (defendant No. 5) without thinking for the benefit of his person and property at the instigation of defendants Nos. 1 to 4...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Smt. Kailashwati and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Raj221
ORDERDwarka Prasad, J.1. In this revision petition the question of privilege claimed by the State of Rajasthan in respect of certain documents has been raised.2. A suit was filed in the court of the Additional District Judge No. 2, Jaipur City in respect of an amount alleged to be due to a contractor for the construction of a minor irrigation project. The defendant, State of Rajasthan, in its written-statement took the stand that nothing was due to the plaintiffs and the deductions alleged to have been made were rightly made. During the course of the trial, the plaintiffs called upon the defendant State of Rajasthan to produce a number of documents, and in respect of four of the documents, which were thus sought to be produced, a claim of privilege was advanced by the defendant State of Rajasthan. Shri Vishnu Dutt, the then Secretary in the Irrigation Department, Government of Rajasthan, filed an affidavit on Jan. 10, 1970 in support of the claim of privilege by the State and he averre...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »