Rajasthan Court March 1985 Judgments
Bheenmal Co-operative Marketing Society Vs. Sumerpur Co-operative Soci ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-26-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN208
G.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a first appeal against the judgment of Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur in civil suit No. 6 of 1971 whereby the suit of the plaintiff has been dismissed on a preliminary issue regarding jurisdiction.2. Both plaintiff and defendant are registered Co-operative Societies functioning under the provisions of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965.3. The appellant supplied goods to respondent No. 1 for sale on commission basis as pertaining to usage prevailing in Sumerpur where the respondent No. 1 does his business. There was dispute about the transactions and the sale price including the accounts. On 7-1-65 Rs. 3000/- were paid to the plaintiff's Manager. A Hundi was drawn for Rs. 10,000/- on respondent No. 1. This Hundi was not honoured. The plaintiff filed a suit for Rs. 22,893.45 P. However, before filing the suit the developments which took place are much more important and they may be noticed now.4. The plaintiff moved an application under Sect...
Tag this Judgment!Hazari Lal S/O Mangal Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN578
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. I have perused the record of the trial Court. The statements of the witnesses recorded Under Section 161, Cr.P.C. and some letters alleged to have been written by Hazarilal and the deceased Smt. Asha Devi were also read over to me.2. The police has submitted challan against Hazarilal, Banwarilal, Om Prakash Under Section 306, IPC. The facts as alleged by the prosecution are that the deceased Smt. Asha Devi was the married wife of Omprakash. A report was lodged on 2-8-83 at 2 p.m. at the police station by Omprakash son of Bharat Lal to the effect that at 7.30 a.m. he left his house for going to his office, and his wife was all alone at the house. At 11 a.m. Subhash informed him that his wife has been burnt at his house. He came to the house along with 3-4 persons and saw that his wife was burning inside the house, the room was locked from inside and hearing the cries Mohallawalas broke open the door and saw that Smt. Asha Devi was lying on the ground with burns...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Ram Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN591
Dwarka Prasad Gupta, J.1. The appellant Ganeshram, was the highest bidder of a public auction conducted by the Land Revenue Inspector in connection with the demand raised against Kapoor Chand, who was the owner of the shop in dispute, as the appellant had given the highest bid for the sum of Rs. 20,101/-. Consequently the sale was knocked down in favour of Ganesh Ram appellant by the Land Revenue Inspector on December 26, 1976. One of the objections taken on behalf of the owner of the shop Kapoor Chand to the said auction sale was that the Land Revenue Inspector had no jurisdiction to conduct the sale because under the provisions of Section 239 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (here in after referred to as 'the Act'), the sale could have been made either by the Collector in person or by the Assistant Collector specially appointed by him in that behalf. The Board of Revenue held that the sale was a nullity. The learned Single Judge agreed with the view taken by the Board of Reven...
Tag this Judgment!Hazarilal and Banwarilal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)221
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. Heard Mr. Dhankar and the learned P.P. I have perused the record of the trial court. The statements of the witnesses recorded Under Section 161, Cr. PC and some letters alleged to have been written by Hazarilal and the deceased Smt. Asha Devi were also read over to me.2. The police has submitted challan against, Hazarilal, Banwarilal and Om Prakash Under Section 306, IPC. The facts as alleged by the prosecution are that the deceased Smt. Asha Devi was the married wife of Omprakash. A report was lodged on 2-8-1983 at 2 P.M. at the police station by Omprakash son of Bharatlal to the effect that at 7-30 A.M. he left his house for going to his office and his wife was all alone at the house. At 11 A.M. Subhash informed him that his wife has been burnt at his house. He came to the house along with 3-4 persons and saw that his wife was burning inside the house, the room was locked from inside and hearing the cries Mohallawals broke open the door and saw that Smt. Ash...
Tag this Judgment!Swarup Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-22-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN251
K.S. Lodha, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. against the order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur, by which the petitioners' revision against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jodhpur dated 7-8-81 was dismissed.2. The facts giving rise to this application briefly stated are that on 7-7-80 the competent authority under the Rajasthan Land Ceiling Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') filed a complaint against the present petitioners 'before the Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jodhpur alleging that the petitioners who were bound to file their returns under Section 6(1) of the Act by 6-10-76,' had failed to furnish the same and had later furnished incomplete returns on 28-2-78 and had thus committed an offence punishable under Section 38(1) of the Act. The learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of this offence by his order dated 7-7-80. The petitioners filed a revision against that order before this Court. One of the grounds rais...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-22-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN646
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal, the suit of whom has been dismissed by the first appellate court. The plaintiff carried on business of cloth at Bundi in the name of M/s Dhanna Lal Chand. The defendant respondent No. 3 issued a warrant of attachment against Narendra Singh son of Bahadur Singh for the recovery of Passengers and Goods Tax due against him and directed the warrant for execution to respondent No. 2 (defendent bio. 2). Under the warrant of attachment, which was issued on February 23, 1967. the liability to pay tax was that of Narendra Singh and that the defendant No. 2 (respondent) No. 2), in execution of the warrant against Narendra Singh, intentionally and maliciously in order to cause harassment to the plaintiff-appellant, attached 1007-1/2 meters of cloth worth Rs. 1479/- from the shop of the plaintiff on March 7, 1967 inspite of plaintiff's protest. This as alleged by the plaintiff, the defendant did in order to defame the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. C.P. Trivedi Vs. University of Jodhpur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN290
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition seeks to quash the seniority rules for teachers of the University of Jodhpur resolved by the Syndicate and issued vide notification No. R/SR/1 dated 7-1-1984 (Annx. 9). He had also prayed for quashing the seniority list dated 31-10-1983 in so far as it relates to the respondents No. 2 to 15. He has further sought a declaration to the effect that the petitioner is senior to the respondents No. 2 to 15.2. I may state come relevant facts. The petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Chemistry pursuant to his selection by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission vide order dated July 13, 1957. His appointment was under the Rajasthan Educational Service (Collegiate Branch) Rules. He was confirmed on the said post w.e.f. July 20, 1958. While the petitioners were holding that post, the University of Jodhpur came to be established and all the Colleges located at Jodhpur were made constituent of that University and members of the Rajasth...
Tag this Judgment!Sampati Lal and ors. Vs. Hari Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-19-1985
Reported in: II(1985)ACC467; AIR1985Raj174; 1985(1)WLN641
S.S. Byas, J.1. This appeal under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939 (for brevity 'the Act' hereinafter) is directed against an award of the Claims Tribunal, Udaipur dated March 5. 1975, by which the appellants were denied the right to prosecute and proceed with the application for claim.2. Recapitulated briefly, the relevant facts are as under.Khemraj, who passed away during the trial, presented an application under Section 110-A of the Act before the Claims Tribunal on Sept. 9. 1972 against the respondents claiming a sum of Rs. 70,000/- as compensation. The case setup by him was that at about 6.15 P.M. on March 20. 1972, he was going from his residence to his shop in the city of Udaipur. When he happened to be near the road-crossing of Bapu Bazar, bus RJL 4759 came from behind and knocked him down. As a result, he fell down and the bus passed over his feet. It resulted in the complete crushing of both his feet. He received multiple injuries. Respondent Harisingh was driving...
Tag this Judgment!Ganpati Lal and ors. Vs. Hhri Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-19-1985
Reported in: I(1986)ACC312
S.S. Vyas, J.1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for brevity 'the Act' hereinafter) is directed against an award of the Claims Tribunal, Udaipur dated March 5, 1975, by which the appellants were denied the right to prosecute and proceed with the application for claim. 2. Recapitulated briefly, the relevant facts are as under.3. Khemraj, who passed away during the trial, presented an application under Section 110-A of the Act before the Claims Tribunal on September 9, 1972 against the respondents claiming a sum of Rs. 70,000/- as compensation. The case set-up by him was that at about 6.15 P.M. on March 20, 1972, he was going from his residence to his shop in the city of Udaipur. When he happened to be near the road-crossing of Bapu Bazar, bus RJL 4759 came from behind and knocked him down. As a result, he fell down and the bus passed over his feet. It resulted in the complete crushing of his both feet. He received multiple injuries. Respondent Hari Singh ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammed Bux Vs. Bashir Mohammed and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN665
Guman Mal Lodha, J. 1. Bashir Mohammed filed a suit on 1-2-60 pleading inter alia that he is the only son of defendant No.1 and defendant No. 2 Mst. Jenab, his step mother. The plaintiff and the defendants were always living in the suit house No. 3/267 (old) and 9/84 (new) situated in Ladpura (Kota). The defendant No. 1 is jobless and so the plaintiff has been feeding him. On 17-1-59 the defendant No. 1 gifted the above suit house to the plaintiff vide a registered gift deed and handedover the proprietory possession of this house to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is in possession of the above said house since then. The boundaries of the house have been mentioned in para 3 of the plaint and they are not in dispute. One Mohammed Hamid Khan was a tenant of a part of this house at the time of the gift for Rs. 15/- per month. As soon as the gift was executed the defendant No. 1 told the tenant that he has gifted the property to the plaintiff and has put him in properitory and in actual posses...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »