Rajasthan Court October 1986 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.
Kana Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-15-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)646
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. In a trial for the offence under Section 302 IPC the appellant was convicted for that charge and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Feeling dissatisfied by his conviction and sentence the appellant has preferred this appeal in this Court.2. Briefly stated that facts of the case revealed from the First Information Report and the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses are that the marriage ceremony of the daughter of Bhagirath PW 5 was performed at village-Kheruwala. The bridal procession had come from village-Fajuwala and appellant Kanaram was a member of the bridegroom's party. On March 22, 1974 at 9.30 a.m. was the ceremony of 'sumathani' (the function of farewell to the bride and the bridal procession). Bhagirath PW 5 had employed Sukhbir PW 3 and deceased Nakli and his wife Smt. Premi PW 4 to clean the utensils. At 9 30 a.m. deceased Nakli and Sukhbir PW 3 were going outside to throw a bucketfull of water used for cleaning the utensils. At that time app...
Bijendra Singh Vs. Administrator Sikar Kendriya Bank Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN145
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.1. The main point for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether because of his acquittal by a Division Bench of this Court of the charge under Section 302/149, I.P.C. the petitioner is entitled for reinstatement, but because the learned Counsel for non-petitioners has raised preliminary objection that in view of Section 75 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act (for short 'the Act') 1965, this writ petition should not be entertained, that point is to be decided first.2. The facts are no longer in dispute. The petitioner was appointed as Branch Manager of Sikar Kendriya Sahkari Bank Ltd. Sikar in the year 1982. While he was serving as such, a First Information Report involving the petitioner for offence under Section 302/149 I.P.C. was filed in the Police Station. The petitioner was tried along with others under Section 302/149 by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar and the said Judge under his judgment dated September 4, 1982 convicted and sente...
Smt. Ishwari Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN629
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing a charge against Smt. Ishwari Devi. The learned Counsel has argued that Smt. Ishwari Devi was never partner of the firm at the time when the inspection was done by the Inspector therefore her challan and also framing of the charge under the Essential Commodities Act should be quashed.2. I have enquired from the learned Counsel whether for the relevant date on which the inspection was made there is any registration of the firm of that date or earlier date either with the Registrar of the firms or with the Income-Tax Authority showing that Ishwari Devi has withdrawn as a partner.3. Obviously there is none.4. In view of the above the detailed enquiry whether on account of the partnership deed having been entered into afresh as alleged by the learned Counsel there was withdrawal of partner Ishwari Devi on relevant date would be enquired into by the trial court. Ishwari Devi will have ful...
R.S.R.T.C. Vs. Smt. Manumati Mohamia and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN712
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is an appeal by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation against the award of compensation in a case of accident of the widow and minor children of the deceased.2. No one has appeared on behalf of the Corporation to support and argue this appeal.3. Mr. G.C. Mathur has appeared on behalf of widow Manumati and the minor children. Mr. Mathur submits that not only this appeal should be dismissed but the interest should be increased from 6 per cent to 12 per cent as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision of Chameliwati v. Delhi Municipal Council 1985 ACJ 645 decided that in case of compensation for accident the rate of interest should be 12 per cent. Mr. Mathur submits that even though the cross objection has not been filed by the widow and minor children yet this court can enhance the rate of interest by resort to Order 41, Rule 33, CPC and even otherwise. He relies upon the two decisions of this court. In Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Ka...
Kishore Singh and anr. Vs. Bharat Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN721
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. No compensation, much less compensation, all under compulsion, compromise wether legal socio-economic exploitation of tears of widow? Rs. 3,000/- compensation for human life, insulting and annoying and less than funeral and death ritual expenses, whether is rape on 'Social Justice' when we are in 'Socialist Era' of Constitution, preparing for 21st Century? Social Security Laws Protective Umbrella' for minors, widows, destitutes handicapped whether reduced to mockery and joke only? Would the 'eyes' of Goddess of Justicia at least now open eyes to see Social COMA & Vulgarity to human suffering?2. A case of ridiculous record for Ginnis Book of World Records. Shameful for 'Social Justice' and shameless accident death claim auctioneers, 'Social Justice' betrayed or unmasked when compensation disparity of sea to sky gets Judicial Seal? Rs. 3,000/- for Hari Singh a cyclewala age 28 years more than Rs. 50,000/- for Dheer Singh a motorwala, age 38 years. Gunwant Kumari w/o...
R.S.R.T.C. Vs. Manumati Mahamia and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-14-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC122
G.M. Lodha, J.1. This is an appeal by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation against the award of compensation in a case of accident to the widow and minor children of the deceased.2. No one has appeared on behalf of the Corporation to support and argue this appeal.3. Mr. G.C. Mathur has appeared on behalf of widow Majumati and the minor children. Mr. Mathur submits that not only this appeal should be dismissed but the interest should be increased from 6 per cent to 12 per cent as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision of Chameliwati v. Delhi Municipal Council 1985 ACJ 645 decided that in case of compensation for accident the rate of interest should be 12 per cent. Mr. Mathur submits that even though the cross objection has not been filed by the widow and minor children yet this court can enhance the rate of interest by resort to Order 41 Rule 33 C.P.C. and even otherwise. He relies upon the two decisions of this court. In Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Kapoor...
Kushal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Raj41; 1987(1)WLN467
J.R. Chopra, J. 1. This reference has been made by a learned single Judge of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 125 of 1982. The question that has been referred for the decision of a larger Bench reads as follows: 'That whether the illegal preparation of the electoral roll can be challenged by way of election petition under Rule 78{d)(iv) of the Election Rules of 1960 or not?' 2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this reference briefly stated are : that the petitioner Kushal Chand is the resient of Ward No. 9 of village Tausar, Tehsil and District Nagaur. He has contested the election for the post of Sarpanch against non-petitioner 5, Shri Mangital, but he has lost it. The petitioner has alleged that while revising the electoral rolls of Gram Panchayat, Tausar, the authorised Officer under the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953, has included 326 names in the electoral rolls wrongly because 142 persons out of them were minors, 61 persons were non-residents and 123...
Narendra Singh Vs. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd., Delhi ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: II(1987)ACC165; AIR1987Raj77
G.M. Lodha, J.1. Narendra Singh is the truck owner in whose truck the claimant injured was travelling at the time of the accident.2. The Tribunal has passed an order under Section 92-A for the payment of Rs. 7500/- to the claimant. In this appeal Mr. Gupta appearing for the appellant made twofold argument; firstly, he submits that since there was no permanent disablement, Section 92-A has no application. Secondly, it was argued that the Insurance Company should be made liable. Mr. Lodha appearing for the Insurance Company submits that insurance company is not liable for various reasons. According to him, the driver has been left out and, therefore, the claim cannot succeed. It was then argued that unless rashness and negligence of the driver is proved against him and he is made party, the claim cannot succeed apart from the misjoinder of the parties in appeal wherein he has been joined. It was then argued that the injured was not travelling for hire or reward and according to the versi...
Gautam Kapoor Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Raj174; 1987(1)WLN548
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. The short question for decision by us is whether the provision made prescribing the minimum age limit of 17 years to be completed during the calendar year of admission to the First year of the M. B. B. S./B. D. S. course is invalid. This reference to a larger Bench has been made on the ground that there appears to be a conflict in the decisions of this Court on this point. The other questions, which have been referred, do not call for any answer as we shall indicate hereafter. The questions referred to us for our decision are as under : --'(1) Whether the Clause 3(c) of the Rules forthe admission in Medical Colleges in Rajasthan which reads as under is ultra vires or not? 'Provided further that the candidates for admission to the first M. B. B. S./ B. D. S. Course must have completed the age of 17 years on or before 31st Dec. of the admission of the year.' (2) Whether the Division Bench can declare any Rules as ultra vires without assigning any reason? (3) Whether th...
Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Lachman Das an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)WLN585
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This Civil Misc. Appeal No. 106 of 1981 relates to challenge the award of compensation in an accident by a motor vehicle Truck No. ROL 4919 on 8-7-1978 where in Than Singh died.2. Than Singh was coming from Ajmer to Makrana when on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver, Sualal, the truck over-turned near Parbatsar. Than Singh was only 30 years of age at that time and was doing the business of selling fruits and vegetables by which he used to earn about Rs. 300/- per month.3. Badrinarain Somani was the ownor of the truck at the time of the accident and it was insured with the Oriental Fire & General Insurance Company Ltd.4. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 48,000/- with interest at 5% against Sualal, driver, Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company and Badrinarain owner of the truck.5. The Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company prayed that the award and decree passed against the Insurance Company may be set saide.6. Learned counsel...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »