Rajasthan Court July 1981 Judgments
Mohan Prakash and ors. Vs. Gulab Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-31-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Raj99; 1981()WLN272
ORDERGuman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is an application under Section 115, Civil P. C. to restore S. B. Civil Revision Petition No. 473/1979, which was dismissed by this Court on account of non-compliance of peremptory order, dated the 20th Dec., 1979, which reads as under :'Issue notices on unserved respondents afresh on filing of the same. Three week's time is allowed to file fresh notices failing which the Revision Petition would stand rejected automatically.'2. Since the above order was not complied with, the office recorded on Jan, 30, 1980 that the revision application is dismissed in non-compliance as per the order of this Court, dated the 20th Dec., 1979.3. Shri Dalip Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that after the peremptory order was passed, there was winter vacations and by inadvertence, the compliance could not be made. He prayed that this Court has got power under Section 148, C. P. C. to restore the case, even though there mighthave been non-compliance...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. (Mrs.) Rukmani Vaish and 5 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and 10 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-31-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN701
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. A 'Crackdown' & 'Mass sacking' of University Lecturers (temporary) on change of ruling party by issuing the Governors Ordinance, whether offends the equal protection Clause, is the billion dollar question, raised under the banner of discrimination between 'pre-emergency' and 'post-emergency' appointees by Section 3 of the Ordinance. The 25th June, 1975' having been made the 'Laxaman Rekha','deadline' or 'D Day, for regularisation of services, the ousted post-emergency Lecturers have invoked Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India to quash the '25th June, 1975', Arbitrary dead line', a 'brainchild' of the then Vice Chancellors and readily welcomed by the then Government, the ruling party of which is alleged to be anti-emergency.2. The ruling political parties existence being temporary and changing, in federal democratic Constitution, but the bureaucracy and services, being permanent, unalloyed, and unadulterated bedrock of the State; should the High Court as w...
Tag this Judgment!Praja Sahkari Udyog Bharatpur Ltd. Vs. Joint Registrar, Co-operative S ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Raj205; 1981()WLN650
ORDERN.M. Kasliwal, J.1. According to the allegations made in the writ petition, the petitioner M/s. Praia Sahkari Udyog Bharatpur Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Society) is a Multi-Unit Co-operative Society which is governed under the Multi-Unit Cooperative Societies Act, 1942 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act). It was originally registered under the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Rajasthan Act) on 3-11-1971 vide registration No. 2079 and later on sought an amendment vide resolutions passed in the general body meeting held on 29-11-1971, notice of which was served upon the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Rajasthan vide registry receipt receipt No. 678, dated 7-12-1971 for seeking amendment for the adoption of Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 and rules made thereunder on the ground that the proposed principal place of business of the petitioner stands shifted from Bharatpur to Launi (U. P.). An order dated 3...
Tag this Judgment!Mewar Bone Mills Vs. Board of Revenue for Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN(UC)208
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer that the orders passed by the Board of Revenue dated May 6, 1977 Annexure-6, by the Revenue Appellate Authority dated March 20, 1972 Annexure 5 and by the Sub Divisional Officer, Chittorgarh dated June 24, 1970 Annexure 4 be quashed and the petitioner be declared khatedar tenant of the land allotted to them in the year 1946 for establishing a Bone Mil) and developing Orchard.2. Succinctly narrated the facts of the case giving rise to this writ petition are as under: An area of 35 bighas and 2 biswas of land situated in Chosunda, Tebsil Chittorgarh was allotted to late Abdul Rehman Admani, father of Md. Ayub, proprietor of the petitioner, M/s Mewar Bone Mills, Chosundra (here in after to be referred as the 'Mills') on June 7, 1946 by the erstwhile State of Mewar. Certain conditions were imposed at the time of that allotment. One of them was, that, on 10 bighas of ...
Tag this Judgment!Sagar Mal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1981
Reported in: [1984]55STC132(Raj)
ORDERDwarka Prasad, J.1. In this writ petition the proceedings regarding sale of tenancy rights in agricultural land have been challenged.2. The petitioner carried on business in the name and style of M/s. Harak Chand Sagarmal, Hanumangarh. Demand in respect of the payment of sales tax relating to the aforesaid business were not satisfied by the petitioner and a sum of Rs. 16,555.12 remained outstanding against the petitioner as arrears of sales tax. As the aforesaid amount of arrears was not paid or realised from the petitioner, the Commercial Taxes Officer decided to realise the aforesaid amount of arrears of sales tax as arrears of land revenue, and attached agricultural land measuring 6 bighas 15 biswas situated in khata No. 11/21 in murabba No. 119/266 in chak 3 KNJ in Hanumangarh Tehsil of District Ganganagar on 28th November, 1972.3. The petitioner raised objections to the attachment and proposed sale of the tenancy rights in the aforesaid agricultural land by his petition dated...
Tag this Judgment!Kartar Singh and anr. Vs. Superintending Irrigation Officer, Superinte ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN(UC)256
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioners are cultivating square Nos. 2, 7, 24, 35 and 51 of Chak No. 34 GG in Tehsil Sri Ganganagar. The existing water Course for cultivating the aforesaid field used to run diagonally across square No. 51 and then in a straight line from stone line No. 108/167 to 108/164. The petitioners represented to the Divisional Irrigation Officer (North), Sri Ganganagar by an application dated July 5. 1972 that the slope of the land in their squares was from east to west and as the existing watercourse was situated on the western side of square Nos. 2, 7, 24 and 35 it was not possible for them to irrigate the entire land of these squares, with the result that the eastern part of the land of the aforesaid squares remained without irrigation, The petitioner sought permission to construct a water course on the eastern side of the aforesaid squares, so that the water course may run in a straight line from stone point 107/168 to 107/164.The petitioners also submitted that the...
Tag this Judgment!Ved Prakash Vs. Rajasthan State Ware-housing Corporation and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN(UC)227
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a Technical Assistant Grade II in the Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') by the order of the Managing Director of the Corporation dated January 27, 1967 and was posted at Pilibanga, Distiict Sri Ganganagar. He was confirmed on the aforesaid post by the order dated July 25, 1968 with effect from June 18, 1968.2. The petitioner was transferred to Sojat Road Office of the Corporation and while he was working there, he was placed under suspension by an order of the Managing Director of the Corporation dated February, 21, 1970. A charge sheet along with a memorandum of allegations dated April 16, 1970 was served upon the petitioner and as a result of the disciplinary inquiry a penalty of stoppage of two grade increments with cumulative effect was imposed upon the petitioner by the order of the Managing Director of the Corporation dated July 6, 1970. An adverse entry in the confidential recor...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanwarlal Vs. Smt. Kamla Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN343
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This revision, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the husband-petitioner Bhanwarlal is directed against the order dated May 25,1981 of the District Judge, Pali, by which, he directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 400/- per month as interim maintenance from the date of the application i.e. December 21, 1979 to the wife-non-petitioner Smt. Kamla Devi.2. The husband-petitioner filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (No. XXV of 1955) for short the Act' herein). During the pendency of the petition, an application under Section 24 of the Act was tiled. The application was resisted. The learned District Judge, by his order dated May 25, 1981 directed the petitioner for payment of interim maintenance as aforesaid. Hence this revision by the petitioner.3. I have heard Mr. D.L. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.R. Singhi learned counsel for the non-petitioner.4. The principal contention raised by Mr., D.L. Mehta, learned c...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal and ors. Vs. Hari Dutt Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Raj21; 1981()WLN660
M.B. Sharma, J.1. This is defendants' second appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. The subject matter of the suit out of which the present second appeal arises is a portion described in para 3 of the plaint, of a house described in para 1 of the plaint situated in Chaukri-pirani-Basti. Jatka-koa ka Rasta, Jaipur. Smt. Phool Kanwar appellant No. 1 the vendor sold her portion in the house to the appellants Gopal and Smt. Durga Devi appellants Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, the vendees, for a consideration of Rs. 2,000 on June 13. 1960 and the sale deed was registered on August 5. 1960.2. Hari Dutt Sharma, the respondent instituted the pre-emption suit on July 3, 1961 in the court of Munsif East, Jaipur against the appellants in which the claim for pre-emption was based on first degree i.e. Shafe-i-Sharik because the building in which the house of the respondent and the appellants were situated had ioint staircase, Chowk. Pol and latrine.3. The suit was contested by the vendor and the...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Rice Flour and Oil Mills Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN(UC)185
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order of attachment dated February 13, 1974 and the notice for sale of immovable property dated October 1, 1974 on the ground that the amount which is sought to be realised was not due against the petitioner firm but the sum represented the dues relating to sales-tax against M/s Hanumandas Harikishan, which was a different firm.2. M/s Hanumandas Harikishan (hereinafter called 'the firm') was a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, with Hanumandas and his son Harikishan as partners. The arrears of sales tax were due against the aforesaid, firm as the demands raised by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Ganganagar were not satisfied by the firm Hanumandas Han Kishan. The aforesaid firm was dissolved in the Samwat Year 2025-26 according to the statement of Gaurishanker. A sum of Rs. 21,527.91 were sought to be realised from. Hanumandas or M/s Hanunidndas Harikishan by way of sale of immovable property viz. 'noliara'...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »