Rajasthan Court November 1983 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.
Mangi Lal and ors. Vs. Suresh Chandra
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-15-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN711
G.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a revision petition by the defendant against them the suit has been dismissed, but as withdrawn with permission to file a fresh suit.2. The two grounds on which the withdrawal was claimed related to non-joinder of the party and also the absence of relief regarding specific performance of contract.3. Mr. R.C. Kasliwal, the learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that firstly, both these defects are not sufficient to permit the withdrawal of suit with permission to file a fresh one. Secondly, in any case, the court is required to record the satisfaction which has not been done in the present case.4. Mr. Kasliwal, then submitted that these defects can be considered in revision in view of the decision in A.I.R. 1940 Bombay 121 Damrao Bhagwantrao Inamdar and Ors. v. Babu Appanna Bemage and Ors. He also submitted that the law is well settled and the non-joinder of a party is not a formal defect. Various decisions have been cited in support of the above cont...
T.L. Bakolia Vs. Heera Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-15-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN754
G.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a tenant's second appeal in a suit for eviction passed on the ground of default.2. According to the plaintiff, the defendant had not paid the rent from 1st January, 1974, at the rate of Rs. 70/- per month. The trial-court first passed an order under Section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950. It is admitted that the rent as determined was not deposited in the trial-court and the monthly rent was also not paid or deposited there-after. Consequently, the defence was stuck-off and the decree was passed after recording a finding that the defendant is a defaulter.3. In appeal, the decree for eviction was maintained but the rent was determined at the rate of Rs. 63/- per month.4. On the above finding of the appellate court, Mr. Karnani, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that, since the order under Section 13 Clause (3) was passed holding that the monthly rent was Rs. 70/- and this ha; been found to be incorrect and that t...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Basti Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-14-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)369
Agarwal, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State, after obtaining leave to appeal under Section 378(3) Cr.PC, against the judgment dated January 28,1974 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pali, in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1973. In the Sessions case aforesaid, 25 persons including the respondents Basti Ram, Ram Chandra, Bhanwarlal, Panji and Mohan, were prosecuted. All the respondents were charged with offences under Sections 147, 447, 315/ 149, 324/149 323/149 IPC and accused Basti Ram, Ram Chandra and Bhanwar Lal were charged with offences under Section 302 IPC and accused Panji and Mohan were charged with the offence under Section 302/149 IPC. The Sessions Judge, by his judgment aforesaid, acquitted all the accused persons and thereupon the State filed a petition for leave to appeal. Leave to appeal was granted as against the respondents but was refused as against the other accused.2. The case of the prosecution is that in village Sojat there is well known as Bera Kundaliya'. The wate...
The State of Rajasthan Vs. Saddiq and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)443
M.C. Jain, J.1. The respondents Saddiq, Mohammed, and Dayam were prosecuted for the offence under Section 307, IPC, and the other two respondents, namely, Sumer and Mana were presecuted for the offence under Sec. 307/302 , IPC . The learned Additional Sessions Judge No. l, Jodhpur, after trial, acquitted all the five accused-respondents of the said offences by his judgment dated 20-2-1974.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that a police party consisting of Head Constable Jugat Singh, Gaimer Singh, Chatar Singh and Shaitan Singh proceeded for patrolling in the night of 19 10-1972 at about 10.00, p.m At about 10.30, p.m. near the crossing of Satto Mayajalar, they concealed themselves behind the sand dune and they spotted at about 11 or 11.30, p.m , 12 persons on the camels' back They were proceeding in the direction, in which the police party was laying ambush. They were spotted when the police party was at a distance of about 300 steps from them. When the accused party was at a dista...
Krishna Roadways Nathdwara and ors. Vs. Madanlal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN556
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. M/s Krishna Roadways, Narhdwara and Saligram, who were non-petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 respectively before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') have filed this appeal under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (No. IV of 1939) (for short 'the Act' herein) against the judgment and award dated October 15, 1973 of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has passed an award for Rs. 11,000/- in favour of the petitioners (Respondents). Respondents No. 1 and 2, are father and mother of one Someshwar. Tbe appellants shall be referred as non-petitioners No. 1 and 2 and respondents No. 1 and 2 shall be referred as the petitioners,2. Respondents No. 3 Rubi General Insurance Company Ltd., Bapu Bazar, Udaipur, was non-petitioner and it will be referred as non-petitioner No. 3 here in after.3. Bus RJT 1517 was owned by non-petitioner No. 1. Its driver was non-petitioner No. 2. This bus left Udaipur bus stand for Bhilwara on 21st June, 1969 at 6.45 p.m....
Krishna Roadways Vs. Madan Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-1983
Reported in: 1(1984)ACC350
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. M/s. Krishna Roadways, Nathdwara and Saligram, who were non-petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 respectively before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') have filed this appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (No. IV of 1939) (for short 'the Act' herein) against the Judgment and award dated October 15,1973 of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has passed an award for Rs. 11,000/- in favour of the petitioners (Respondents). Respondents No. 1 and 2, are father and mother of one Someshwar. The appellants shall be referred as non-petitioners No. 1 and 2 and respondents No. 1 and 2 shall be referred as the petitioners.2. Respondent No. 3 Rubi General Insurance Company Ltd., Bapu Bazar, Udaipur was non-petitioner and it will be referred as non-petitioner No. 3 hereinafter.3. Bus RJY 1517 was owned by non-petitioner no. 1. Its driver was non-petitioner No. 2. The bus left Udaipur bus stand for Bhilwara on June 21, 1969 at 6.45 p.m. Somes...
Ganpat Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-1983
Reported in: [1985]59STC138(Raj)
ORDERN.M. Kasliwal, J. 1. The petitioner is running a textile industry consisting of power-looms at Madanganj, Kishangarh. He is registered under both the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was entitled to remission of purchase tax in respect of raw material which he purchased for the purpose of manufacturing of cloth under Section 5CC of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). According to the petitioner, he installed the textile industry on 19th February, 1979. The Government of Rajasthan had invited the entrepreneurs to install their industries with a concession to grant remission of purchase tax under Section 5CC inserted by amendment Act No. 5 of 1970 in the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. Initially remission was allowed from the date of the amending Act of 1970 till 31st March, 1974 but subsequently the period was further extended up to 31st March, 1979 by amending Act ...
State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Goparam and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)594
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. Both these appeals are directed against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Merta, dated March 30, 1974 in Sessions Case No. 28/ 37. In the aforesaid Sessions case five persons, namely, Gopa Ram and his four sons Ramdeen, Sangram, Dayalram and Udaram were prosecuted. All the accused were charged with offence under Section 148 CPC. Accused Sang Ram was charged with the offence under Section 302 IPC and the other accused persons were charged with the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. Accused Dayalram was charged with the offence under Section 324 IPC and the other accused persons were charged under Section 324 read with Section 149 IPC. Accused Ramdeen and Budharam were charged with the offence under Section 323 IPC, but they along with other accused persons were also charged under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC. The Sessions Judge acquitted accused Goparam of all the charges. He convicted accused Sangram of the offence under Section 304, Part...
Poonma Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)364
M.C. Jain, J.1. The appellant Poonma was convicted of the offence under Section 302, 404 and 201, IPC, by the Sessions Judge, Balotra, by his judgment dated July 18, 1975. He was sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo 5 months' rigorous imprisonment on the first count and on the second count he was sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fime of Rs. 200/ in default, to undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment. No separate sentence was awarded for the offence Under Section 201, IPC. The substantive sentences on the first two counts were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the deceased Moti Tath left his house some 5-7 days before Deewali of 1973 and thereafter was not seen alive. He did not return on Deewali and a search was made for him. On 27-12-1973, it is alleged that the appellant Poorma went to Bhur Singh Rajput of villege Bhiyada and he disclosed him that some 7-8 days befor...
Ram Chandra Vs. S.T.A.T. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-1983
Reported in: 1983WLN(UC)399
Dwarka Prasad Gupta, J.1. The question which has been raised in this writ petition relates to the plying of stage carriage vehicles on Merta City--Pipar Road route (hereinafter referred to as 'the route') and more particularly to the via of the route.2. The petitioner is an existing operator of Gotan--Pipar City route, being the transferee of the permit of Mohd. Ibrahim. The petitioner's route is via Kawaspura, Chokri and Siyara. It is not disputed that initially two non-temporary stage carriage permits were granted on March 8, 1956 on the route and the original route of those permits was Merta City--Pipar Road via Hariyadhana Madaliya and Borunda. In the year 1958, both the permits were transferred to Amraram and Vijayraj, who held them jointly. An application for change of the via of the route, so as to incorporate Kawaspura, Chokri and Siyara, in place of Hariyadhana, Madaliya, Borunda was submitted before the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the R.T...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »