Skip to content

Rajasthan Court September 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.

Sep 03 1985

Govanji Vs. Smt. Kaduva

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Sep-03-1985

Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)307

Panna Chand Jain, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 24th April, 1984, passed by the District Judge, Doongarpur, in Civil Misc. Case No. 15/82 by which the marriage between the appellant and respondent was dissolved by a decree for divorce on the ground of cruelty.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that parties were married at Upargaon District Doongarpur, according to the Hindu custom. The petitioner is the wife, she alleged against her husband that on a number of occasions he has given beating and treated her with cruelty. He also turned her out from the house and thereafter did not take any care of her. Thus, the petitioner has based her petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. In reply, the husband contended that the allegations levelled against him by the wife are false and frivolous and he never gave any beating to her. He pleaded that her father Memji wanted to give her in 'Nata' for purpose of personal gains. Th...


Sep 03 1985

State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Smt. Shankuntla and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Sep-03-1985

Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)337

Panna Chand Jain, J.1. As a result of motor accident that happened on 23rd March, 1979 at about 9.50 P.M. claimants Cpt. Gunwant Singh and his wife Smt. Shakuntla sustained injuries. They filed separate claims petitions before the Accident Claims Tribunal, the Tribunal awarded claim of Cpt. Gunwant Singh to the extent of Rs. 26,000/- and claim of Smt. Shakuntla was allowed to the extent of Rs. 22,000/-. Though, two separate claims petitions were filed but the learned Claims Tribunal disposed of the case by one single order.2. Aggrieved by the Award dated 16-10-1981 passed by the Claims Tribunal, two separate appeals have been filed by the State. As the driver of the Jeep was in the employment of the State. The two appeals have been registered as S.B. Civil Misc. Appeals No. 8/82 and 9/82. The claimants have also filed cross-objections for enhancing the amount of compensation. The aforesaid two appeals and the cross-objections are being disposed of by this 'judgment as they are arising ...


Sep 02 1985

Dr. Laxmi and ors. Vs. the State and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Sep-02-1985

Reported in: AIR1986Raj149; 1986(1)WLN216

S.K. Mallodha, J.1. A learned single Judge of this Court has referred the writ petition to the Division Bench as it raises the question with respect to the validity of the Notification Ex. 6 dt. April 28, 1977 issued under Section 17(4) and Section 6 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 (No. XXIV of 1953) (for short 'the Act') and according to him, the correctness or otherwise of the decision in Kanwar Chandra Singh v. State of Rajasthan, ILR (1961) 11 Raj486, is also involved and as such, it should be determined by the Division Bench in the light of the subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court. This is how this writ petition is before us.2. The original petitioners were Narendra Singh, Nahar Singh and Sobhag Kumari. During the pendency of the writ petition, Narendra Singh died and his legal representatives, who are now petitioners Nos. 1/1 to 1/4, have been brought on record.3. A bungalow and vacant land surrounding it was gifted to Rao Raja Narpatsinghji by the former ruler o...


Sep 02 1985

Kurda Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Sep-02-1985

Reported in: 1985(2)WLN229

Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.PC is directed against the order dated the 6th April, 1984, of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Rajgarh district Churu taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 147 and 323 IPC against the petitioners who are nine in number.2. The case relates to the incident which took place on March 25, 1982 at about 10 A.M. in the market near a temple at Taranagar. A first information report of the occurrence was lodged by Trilok Chand, who is petitioner No. 2 in this case, at the Police Station, Taranagar on the same day at about 10.30 A.M. The story set up in this report briefly stated, was that while Trilok Chand was returning from the market and was near the temple, Nauranglal, non-petitioner No. 2 met him and caused injuries to him. He raised an alram which attracted several persons including Sarjoo Teli, Mohan Singh and Pramod Kumar, Trilok Chand was taken to the Police Station, Taranagar in a cart where he filed the af...


Sep 02 1985

Ladu and Kana Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Sep-02-1985

Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)289

Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7th October, 1977, of the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, convicting and sentencing the appellants as under:1. Ladu Under Section 324 IPC one year's RI and a fine ofRs. 500/-; in default of pay-ment of fine to further RI for three months.Under Section 324 IPC 18 months' RI and a fineof Rs. 500/-; in default ofpayment of fine to threemonths' further RI.2. Kana Under Section 324 read one year's RI and a fine ofwith Section 34 IPC Rs. 500/-; in default of pay-ment of fine to further RI for three months.Under Section 457 IPC 18 months RI and a fine ofRs. 500/- in default of pay-ment of fine to three months further RI.The sentences were directed to run concurrently. The case relates to the incident which took place on the night of October 29, 1976, at the house of Mohanlal Harijan resulting in injuries to Mohanlal. It is alleged that Mohanlal on the night of the incident was sleeping at his house when the accused ...


Sep 02 1985

Sadhvi Smt. Laxmi Das and anr. Vs. Sub-divisional Magistrate and anr.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Sep-02-1985

Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)349

Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr. PC. is directed against the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate dated the 7th January, 1983 and the attachment of the property made on January 19, 1983, The subject of dispute is a building in Kolayat which the petitioners call as 'Kabir Ashram'. On 6, 1983, an application was filed by Shri Panna Lal Barupal respondent No. 2, the then President of 'Jagjeevan Sarvodaya Ashram Trust, Kolayat', in the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate (south), Bikaner, on the averments that the property in dispute was given to the Trust by the Government for use as a Chhatravas'. The Trust got the possession of the property in 1969 and was using the same as 'Chhatravas' and Dharmashala. There was a fair ('MELA') in Kolayat on November 30, 1982 and Shri Pannalal and his family went there, stayed in the building and after the fair was over, they returned to Bikaner after locking the rooms and the main gate of the said building. After about 20 day...


Sep 02 1985

Nanda Vs. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Sep-02-1985

Reported in: 2(1986)ACC303

N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against an order passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dated 20-9-84 in claim petition No. 17 of 1982. The petitioner Nanda had filed a claim petition against one Jageshwar Singh driver of the vehicle, Tilok Chand owner of the vehicle and the New India Assurance Company Limited. On 23rd August, 1984 an order was passed by the Claims Tribunal to the effect that the registered A.D. of non-petitioner No. 2 Tilok Chand had not returned back as such, the notices may again be issued against non-petitioner No. 2 and three days time was granted to the petitioner to file the fresh registered A.D. The next date in the case was fixed as 20-9-84. It appears that the petitioner did not file the registered A.D. within three days and filed it on 17th September, 1984. The learned Claims Tribunal as such passed an order on 20-9-84 that the petitioner had filed the process fee of the non-petitioner No. 2 after long delay and he did not co...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial