Rajasthan Court October 1985 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. Panchi W/O Mohan Vs. Bansi Lal and anr. (Bansi Lal Through Lrs.)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-11-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN187
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the case was adjourned for permitting Shri Purohit of find out if any contrary view to the decision of this Court in Khairathi v. Devi Sahai and Ors. AIR 1974 Raj. 131, has been taken by this Court or any judgment of the Supreme Court or Privy Council is available. Shri Purohit fairly and frankly submitted that in view of the judgment of this Court in Khairathi v. Devi Sahai (supra), the case will have to be remanded to the trial court for consideration of the other issues on merits.2. All that can held by this Court on the basis of the decision Kharathi's (supra) case is that the right to scavenge the house in the particular locality can be enforced and the suit is maintainable under Section 9, CPC. This has been treated as civil right and property right. Since it is common ground that in view of the above decision the right exists and in the earlier judgments of this Court Mt. Chandi v. Ram pratap it was held tha...
Sardar Mal Vs. Kastoora Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-11-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN76
Panna Chand Jain, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 19th May, 1979, passed by the learned Munsif, Jalore in Execution Case No. 444 of 1974.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that non-petitioner Kastur Ram mortgaged his house to the petitioner vide registered-deed dated 12th March, 1970 and, the house was thereupon given on rent to the non-petitioner at rate of Rs. 50/- per month. A suit for recovery of rent was filed by the petitioner against the non-petitioner and on compromise the suit was decreed and later on an execution petition was filed for the recovery of rent amounting to Rs. 2034.25. In the execution proceedings, the decree-holder petitioner got attached the house situated in Jalore. A notice for auction of the house was served under Order 21, Rule 66, CPC. The non-petitioner filed a petition contending that the house is not attachable under Section 60(c), CPC as the said house is being used for keeping agricultural material. The learned...
Nihal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-11-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN762
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. The appellants have been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar by his judgment dated October 29, 1980 as under:(1) Nihal Singh Under Section 148, IPC Six months' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fineto further undergo 15 days simpleimprisonment;Under Section 302/149, IPC Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 4 months' simpleimprisonment;Under Section 307/149, IPC One year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 month's simple imprisonment;Under Section 27, Arms Act One year's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/, in default of pay-ment of fine to further undergo 3months simple imprisonment;Under Section 25, Arms Act Six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/- in default of pay-ment of fine to further undergo 2months imprisonment;(2) Pratap Under Section 148, IPC Six months' R.I....
Ram Chandra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-11-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)328
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated the 22nd January, 1982 of the Assistant Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Jodhpur reverting the petitioner to the post of a peon. Petitioner was a Cook in the Railway Hospital at Jodhpur. He proceeded on sick leave and on resumption of duty he was directed to appear before the Railway doctor. The Railway Doctor declared him fit for C-II and unfit for class B-I. On appeal the Chief Medical Officer found the petitioner fit for class B-I with glasses but declared him unfit for the job of a cook. Subsequently the impugned order was passed by the Assistant Personnel Officer, which has given rise to the present petition.2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner having been classified as B-I on appeal was entitled to the post of a Cook as the standard of medical fitness for this post was B-I. It was a case of reversion to a lower post.3. I called upon the counsel for the non-petitioners to clar...
Mst. Chimo and Sonia Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-11-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)359
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. Both these appeals are directed against the judgment dated the 12th April, 1975, of the Additional Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC to, life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to 6 months' further rigorous imprisonment and under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC to 5 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to three months' further rigorous imprisonment. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The case relates to the incident which took place on December 3, 1973, in the morning at the outskirts of village Hopandi, which resulted in the death of Bhanwarlal and injuries to Dalaram. The prosecution case, in brief, was that Dalaram had cut and collected grass in his field. On the date of the incident at about 9.00 am, he saw the accused Sonia and Bhooria carrying away that grass. When ...
Prabhu Dayal Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-11-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)529
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. Petitioner by this writ petition has challenged his discharge from the service2. Petitioner was appointed as Group Sachiv on ad hoc basis in the Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti, Shahpura in the pay scale of 295-500 by the order dated 24-3-1982 vide Anx. 1 Thereafter his term of appointment was further extended by the order dated 20-4-1982 for another period of six months. The case of the petitioner was placed before the Administration and Finance Standing Committee. The said Committee by their resolution dated 2-8-1982 decided that petitioner's services may be regularised because he is likely to be over age It is further said that in this connection the Secretary Zila Parishad, Bhilwara may be approached for sympathetical consideration. Petitioner further submits that he had given in writing to the respondent Samiti that he agreed to continue in service and if his services are not extended by the Zila Parishad, he will not claim any salary for the period beyond the ...
Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Sukh Deo Gulab Chand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-10-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN777
Kishan Mal Lodha, J.1. The Board of Revenue, Rajasthan ('the Board') has referred the following question of lav to this Court in pursuance of the directions given by this Court in Commercial Taxes Officer, Pali v. Sukhdeo Gulab Chand D.B. Sales Tax Reference Application No. 75/76, decided on Aug. 23, 1977:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue was justified in setting aside the order of penalty imposed on the assessee under Section 16(1)(b) (as it then stood) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 ?2. The assessee (respondent) is a partnership concern dealing in cereals, pulses, oilseeds etc. and at the relevant time, carried on its business at Jaitaran, district Pali. For the year 1965-66, the assessee filed one consolidated return on January 3, 1966, ending on October 4, 1965, for a gross turnover of Rs. 229793.03 and taxable turnover was shown nil. A revised return for the entire period was later on filed on January 25, 1967 for increased gross...
Nand Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-10-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN18
1. This revision is directed against an order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara dated August 6, 1984, by which the order of the Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Mandalgarh dated January 29, 1983 passed under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was set-aside and the property (a camel and a cart) was delivered to the complainant Ram Narain.2. Briefly recounted, the relevant facts giving rise to this revision petition are that the complainant Ram Narain lodged a written report at Police Station, Kotri on December 4, 1983 stating there in that accused Nandlal had taken a cart and a camel from him on rent of Rs. 200/- per month. The accused kept the cart and camel with him for some time. Thereafter he returned the cart and the camel to the complainant and paid sum of Rs. 650/- as rent to him somewhere before November 4, 1982. Since then the cart and the camel were in his (complainant's) possession. However, in the evening of December 4, 1982, when the complainant was...
Pannalal Kothari Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-09-1985
Reported in: [1986]162ITR158(Raj)
1. The abovementioned four references relate to the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64, 1965-66 and 1966-67, respectively. As identical questions of law arise in all the four cases, the same are disposed of by one single order. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the statement of the case are that Shri Pannalal Kothari, hereinafter referred to as 'the assesses', was working as the managing director of M/s. Mahalaxmi Cotton Mills, Beawar (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'), during the relevant assessment years. He was appointed as managing director of the company by an agreement on May 7, 1960, for a period of five years, vide the resolutions of the board of directors of the said company. It was resolved in the resolutions that 'the company should engage and employ Shri Pannalal Kothari as managing director who should serve the said company on the said terms and conditions herein set forth......' 3. According to Clause (1) of the agreement, it was provided tha...
Hanuman and ors. Vs. Hari Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-09-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN677
1. This is a special appeal against the judgment of learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Regular First Appeal No. 94/68 dated 23rd July, 1973 whereby the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Distt. Judge, Sikar, was set-aside and a preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiffs-appellants was passed holding him to be entitled to l/7th share of the properties.2. Dissatisfied with the judgment of learned Single Judge, the defendant appellants have filed this special appeal.3. A suit was filed regarding partition of 3 properties situated at Sikar, in which the plaintiff filed a suit for partition of the joint family properties. The plaintiff stated that Goru Ram had six son; eldest being Ridh Karan. He died in the year 1965 before filing of the suit. Second son was Hanuman, defendant No. l/3rd Son was Kanhaiyalal, defendant No. 2. Plaintiff Subkaran was 4th son and 5th son was Raghunath, who was deaf and dumb and he is defendant No. 3. Youngest son was Devi Dutt, defendant No. 4. I...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »