Rajasthan Court September 1980 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.
Uma Shanker and anr. Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-06-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)372
K.D. Sharma, Acting C.J.1. This is a special appeal filed by Uma Shankar and Bijai Shanker sons of Shri Prayag Chand Purohit under Clause 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance against the order of a learned Single Judge of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No 1631 of 1970, by which the appellants were not held Khatedar tenants of the land in dispute and a writ of prohibition was not issued restraining the respondents from dispossessing the appellants from the disputed land.2. The relevant facts giving rise to this special appeal may be briefly stated as follows: Kunwar Jagjeet Singh son of Rao Devi Singh of village Pugal was recorded as Khatedar tenant of 409 Bighas and 9 Biswas of land comprised in Khasra No 292 of Village Bariyoneala in Tehsil Bikaner in the revenue records from October 15, 19(sic)5 and thereafter, Kunwar Jagjeet Singh sold a (sic) to the appellants vide registered sale deed dated September 13, 1958.his Khatedari rights in 75 Bighas of land out of the said la...
Darshan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)409
M.B. Sharma, J.1. Accused Darshansingh has been convicted under Section 326 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month under the first count and to one year's rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 324, Indian Penal C de and in default to further suffer one month's rig(sic)ous imprisonment under she second count.2 In brief, the case of the prosecution is that September 29, 1974, at the hotel of one Hasmatrai at Ganganagar, Ramkumar PW 1, Shivlehari PW 2 Jangsharkhan PW 3 and Ramsingh PW 4 were taking their meals in the night at about 9.00 pro The accused appellant was also having his meals in the same hotel and was also consuming alcohol. The accused appellant enquired of Shivlehari PW 2 as to where Raghuvir, a driver of the roadways has gone and Shivlehari PW 2 replied that Raghuvir had gone to Jaipur...
Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)323
K.S. Sidhu, J.1. Mr. Dave on behalf of P N. Vijay, respondent 2 herein, has filed a cavaet and has entered appearance today in accord ance with the caveat.2. The petitioners' grievance in the present application 482 Cr. P.G, in ultimate analysis, is against the order dated April 7, 1980, whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bharatpur took cognizance of the offence under Section 420 IPC in respest of the petitioners on police report filed before him in accordance with Section 173 Cr P.G. It may be mentioned here that the petitioners application for revision from the aforementioned order was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated, August 30,1980.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out what he described as certain glaring illeglities in the order passed by the learned Magistrate and the order of affirmance passed by the learned Sessions Judge. No useful purpose will be served by going into all these matters in this case. The petitioners' gr...
Rampal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Raj121
ORDERDwarka Prasad, J.1. The petitioners are residents of Mundara Mohalla, situated in the town of Mandal in Bhilwara District. Their case is that in Mundara Mohalla, there is a blind lane and a common Chowk in the centre, which is surrounded by the houses of the petitioners and others. The petitioners' grievance is that water of domestic use, including dirty water from the houses of the Mohalla, as also rain water has collected in the chowk and because there is no drain for the discharge of the accumulated water, there is growth of moss and insects and there is possibility of spread of epidemics. The petitioners have relied upon a letter written in this connection by the Medical and Health Officer. Government Hospital, Bhilwara, on June 18, 1979, to the Executive Officer of the Municipal Board. Mandal inviting his attention to the fact that stagnant water, which has collected in the common chowk of the Mimdara Mohalla, has become the breeding place of mosquitoes and insects and may ca...
Duleh Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)334
M.B. Sharma, J.1. The learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, has convicted the accused appellant under under Section 354, IPC and has sentenced him to one year's rigorous imprisonment.2. In short, the case of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix Smt. Mohini PW 1 is the wife of Bhanwarlal by carte Kumhar. The said Bhanwarlal had taken the fields of one seth Mindalal for cultivation during the year 1975. The fields arc situated at a distance of about 1 1/2 to 2 miles from the village Napasar. Smt Mohini PW 1 used to go to the fields to keep a watch and on July 30, 1975, as usual. she had gone to her field and at about 12.00 noon, was taking her meals in the field while sitting under the shadow of a 'Khejri' (tree), Her two year old child was in her lap It is alleged that the accused appellant, who was working as a labourer in the near by field came there and asked Smt. Mohini that he was feeling thirsty It is alleged that Sail. Mohini gave water from an earthen pot which she was having and ...
Mutha Parasmal JaIn and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Raj139
ORDERGuman Mal Lodha, J. 1. 'Price Control' with 'Cheers' or 'tears' is the real question though it has been camouflaged in legal constitutional debate.2. These 324 writ petitions have been filed by the Sugar Dealers of Rajasthan challenging the validity of the Levy Sugar Supply (Control) Order, 1979 (hereinafter to be called as 'Levy Sugar Order') Sugar Retention and Sale (By Recognised Dealers) Order, 1979 (hereinafter to be called as 'Retention Order'), Sugar Price (Determination of 1978-79) Order 1979 (hereinafter to be called as 'the Price Determination Order'), and the various directions issued therein, including the orders issued by the Collectors of the various places and other administrative orders demanding sale of 65% of Sugar stock, to the State Government. Earlier 231 such writ petitions were heard by the Jaipur Bench of this Court and on March 14, 1980 by a composite order, this court dismissed those writ petitions and while doing so, adjudicated the controversies raised ...
Ranchoredass Vs. Malookchand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN580
S.N. Deedwania, J.1. This revision is preferred by defendant-petitioner Ranchoredass against the judgment and decree, dated February 5, 1977 of learned Civil Judge, Barmer.2. The necessary facts may thus briefly be stated. That the non-petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1400/- in the court of Munsif, Balotra with the allegations that the defendant-petitioner took a loan of Rs. 1000/- from him on 11-9-71 and executed a pronote for the same. The suit was filed on 24-9-74 and the defendant-petitioner took an objection that no decree could be passed against him in view of breach of Sections 22 and 23 of the Rajasthan Money Lenders Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). In view of the amended Section 26 of the Act, the trial court held that the suit has to be dismissed, because the non-petitioner-plaintiff failed to comply with the provision of Sections 22 and 23 of the Act and consequently, dismissed the suit on 29-6-76. The case was taken up in appeal and the...
Akal Raj Mehta Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)345
D.P. Gupta, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the State Government on 3-12-1979. The circumstances, which have led to the filing on the present writ petition may be briefly narrated.2. Jodhpur Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd, Jodhpur (hereinafter called) 'the Bask') is a co-operative society duly registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act'). A Board of Directors of the Bank was elected on December 21, 1975 which consisted of 9 Directors and the petitioner Shri Akal Raj Mehta was elected as the Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Bank Later on a suit was filed by the petitioner in the court of Munsiff, Jodhpur City for the removal of the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Back and in that such, an interim injunction was issued by the learned Munsiff on June 12, 1979 restraining the Chairman of the Bank from performing the functions and duties of such Chairman....
Nand Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)336
M.B. Sharma, J.1. The above-named accused-appellant a consumer of electricity for agricultural purposes, has been convicted under Sections 333 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code. Under the former count he has been sentenced to five years 5 rigorous imprisonment; under the second count, to one year's and six months rigorous imprisonment and under the third count also to the same imprisonment. The substantive sentences on each count were to run concurrently.2. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that in village Dhankoli, the accused-appellant has lands measuring 17 Bighas, and the fields are irrigated from a well. The accused appellant has electric connection on his well and as such he is a consumer of electricity of the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (RSEB). There were same complaints about the low voltage, and therefore, on January 19, 1975, Ass...
State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Bherulal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)588
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This appeal by defendant-appellants is directed against the judgment and decree dated March 20, 1973, passed by the District Judge, Pratapgarh in Civil Suit No. 8 of 1971, by which the plaintiff-respondents' suit for Rs. 37,000/- was decreed against the defendants with costs. It was further ordered by the learned District Judge that the plaintiff shall be entitled to interest amount at 6% per annum on Rs. 31,112/- from the date of the suit (July 31, 1971) until the date of the realisation.2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal may briefly be recounted here : The plaintiff obtained a licence from the Excise Department for the sale of country liquor under the guarantee system in respect of the two shops (Surajpol and Talai) situate in Partabgarh for Rs. 3,11,120/- for the period commencing from April 1, 1967 to March 31, 1968. The plaintiff deposited Rs. 31,112 as security deposit. The case of the plaintiff was that there was a shortage of liquor durin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›