Rajasthan Court December 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.
Hari Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-15-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)78
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. The petitioner Hari Singh has filed this writ petition paying for issue of a writ, direction or order to quash the order of the Addl. Collector, Jodhpur dated 8-11-1985 by which the learned Addl. Collector has set aside the 'patta' granted to the petitioner and has directed an enquiry by the Gram Panchayat whether or not to grant the 'patta' of the disputed land to the petitioner.2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated here. The petitioner Hari Singh is a resident of Barli Tehsil Jodhpur. He had applied for grant of 'patta' in respect of a piece of land marked red in the site plan (Anx. 1) filed along with the writ petition. This piece of land is situated adjacent to the house of non-petitioner Jograj Singh and is opposite to the petitioner's own house which is across the road on the other side. The petitioner claimed possession over this land since the time of his ancestors and prayed for the grant of 'patta' in order to regularise his own possession a...
Kanaram and 8 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-12-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN225
Farooq Hasan, J.1. Kanaram, Hanuman, Bhanwar alias Bhura, Jeewan, Gopiram, Ratna Ram, Chhitar, Phula and Mohan, all the appellants in this appeal are aggrieved against the judgment dated 23rd April. 1983, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sikar, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced as under:Kanaram, Hanuman, Bhanwar Under Section 147, I.P.C. 1 year's RI;alias Bhura, Gopiram, RatnaRam & MohanJeewan, Chhitar & Phula Under Section 148, I.P.C. 1 year's RI;All the appellants named Under Section 302/149 I.P.C. Life imprisonment withabove fine of Rs. 1,000/- indefault, 6 month's RI;Under Section 325/149, I.P.C. 3 year's RI with fine ofRs. 500/- in default, 3month's RI;Under Section 323, I.P.C. 6 month's RI.2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that, on the report of one, Prabhudayal s/o Ramuram which, was lodged on July 19, 1982, at the police station Dantaramgarh (District Sikar, Rajasthan), at about 3 p.m., a case No. 51/82 was registered and the investigation commenced. According t...
Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. Joint Secretary, I.T.i. Trade Employees Associ ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-12-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)39
K.S. Lodha, J.1. M/s Hindustan Zinc Ltd. has filed this appeal against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated December 6, 1985, by which its writ petition has been dismissed.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated here. Respondent No. 2 Rameshwarlal Saadhya was employed in the Zinc Smelter, Debari of the petitioner-company as an Electrician on January 13, 1977. It was alleged that Rameshwarlal was in the habit of remaining absent from his duties unauthorisedly. On the last occasion when he absented himself without permission, a registered letter was sent to him on April 29/30, 1981 to join duties immediately, but he did not report on duty and continued to remain absent. Thereupon, an order was passed on May 15, 1981 stating that Rameshwarlal had remained absent from duty unauthorisedly for a continuous period of more than eight calender days without any authority and, therefore, his services have been terminated in terms of clause 12(f)(1) of t...
Mangalam Cement Ltd. and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Raj186; 1987(2)WLN643
ORDERM.B. Sharma, J.1. In the above numbered six writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the vires of the Rajasthan Land Tax Act, 1985 (for short, the State Act). The State Act was passed by the Rajasthan State Legislature in 1985 and received the assent of the Governor on July 31, 1985. According to its preamble it is law which has been enacted to provide for imposition of tax on land in areas other than urban areas in the State of Rajasthan and the matters incidental thereto. Under Section 3 of the State Act the tax is imposed on the annual value of the land. Annual valuehas been defined in Section 2(a) of the State Act. So far as the annual value in the case of land which are governed by the mining leases is concerned, it is given in Section 2(a)(i) of that Act. The petitioners, have challenged the vires of the Act inter alia on the ground that it is beyond the legislative competence of the Legislature and covered under entry No. 54 of the Union List-I of the VIIth Schedule t...
Chhagna S/O Raju Gujar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)66
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. On November 28, 1976 at about 8.30 a.m., Shyam Lal Bhati, Food Inspector, Gulabpura Town was on his inspection round and found the petitioner carrying milk in two containers on his bicycle infront of a small hotel of Patu Lal. The Food Inspector asked the petitioner to stop but on his failing to do so, the Inspector chased the petitioner and caught the latter near the hotel of Teekam. He brought the petitioner at the hotel of Patu Lal. Suspecting that the milk which was being carried by the petitioner was adulterated, the Food Inspector prepared a notice Ex. P 1 in Form VI to be given to the petitioner of his intention to send the sample of the milk for the purpose of analysis to the Public Analyst and asked the petitioner to sign it. The petitioner did not sign Ex P. 1, and went away with one out of the two containers containing milk under an excuse that he was coming back after easing himself. The Food Inspector waited for the return of the petitioner but t...
Chander Vs. Bhawani Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1986
Reported in: 2(1988)ACC292
I.S. Israni, J1. These four appeals arise out of the same award and they are disposed of by one judgment. These appeals have been filed under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (herein after called the Act), against the award, dated December 27,1985, passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, in case No. 69/1983, it will suffice to state for the purpose of these appeals that deceased Shobbraj, who was driving his car, while returning from Ajmer to Jaipur, alongwith his wife appellant Smt. Deepa and other appellants Shri Chander and Smt. Vandana, met with an accident near Hira Pura, on Ajmer Road with truck, which was alleged to be driven rashly and negligently at a fast speed. It is further stated that the truck came on the wrong side and dashed against car with such a force that the roof of the car ripped open and the car was dragged to a distance, the occupants of the car were thrown; after the impact the truck went to a distance of 50 to 60 ft. and turned turtle. ...
Artee Minerals and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-10-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1086; 1987(1)WLN94
ORDERM.C. Jain, J.1. The petitioners have been summoned by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara, on registration of the case against them, on complaint filed by the Asstt. Inspector, Udaipur, Agriculture Quality Control under Insecticides Act, 1968. Petitioner 1 is the firm and petitioners 2 to 5 are its partners. The petitioner 6 is the Chief Executive and the petitioner 7 is the Senior Sales Representative. In para 12 of the complaint, the only allegation made against petitioners 2 to 7 are that they are responsible persons.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners urged that the essential and requisite allegations whereby penal liability may be attracted, have not been made against the petitioners, so they cannot be held liable and no cognizance can be taken against them. The learned Magistrate has erred in ordering issue of the process against them after taking cognizance. learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a decision of this Court in P.R. Neelkanth v. State ...
Darshan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-10-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN526
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar dated April 26, 1985, whereby, the appellants have been convicted of the offences under Sections 452 and 392, I.P.C. read with Section 397 arid Section 27, Arms Act. Under Section 452 I.P.C., the appellants have been sentenced to 2 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 392, I.P.C. read with Section 397, they have been sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six month's simple imprisonment and under Section 27 Arms Act, two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment. Jogendra Singh and Mithu Singh have been further convicted under Section 25 Arms Act and have been sentenc...
Dal Singh Vs. Surjeet Singh and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-10-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)704
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. Dal Singh has filed this application under: Section 482, Cr. P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against him and pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh for offence under Section 302, read with Section 114, IPC.2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to this application are as under. On March 13, 1970, Surjeet Singh, non-petitioner No. 1, lodged a report before the police giving out the following story. At 12.30 p.m. on that day, Surjeet Singh along with his brother Balveer Singh and Jageer Singh and Jagroop Singh had started from Surjeet Singh's house for village Jandwala Sikhan to see the ailing wife of one Jiwan Singh and when they had reached a point near the house of one Ram Singh, they found Dal Singh, Chhotu Singh, Genda Singh, Hansa Singh and Milkiyat Singh sitting in a pit. As the complainant's party approached, Dal Singh and others stood up and Dal Singh shouted-'the enemies had come, murder them'. Mi...
Poorana Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-09-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)46
S.S Byas, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment of the learded Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar dated September 1, 1981, by which the three appellants Poorana Ram. Begha Ram and Dula Ram were convicted under Section 302/34, IPC and each was sentenced to imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo six month's simple imprisonment. Accused Begha Ram was also convicted under Section 323, IPC but instead of being sentenced to any punishment, he was let off on six months, probation of good conduct.2. Succinctly stated, the prosecution case is that PW 1 Bagiya and PW 2 Mukangir are the brothers of the deceased-victim Phoolgir. They have three more brothers by name Malgir, Heeragir and Arjungir. Malgir was allotted agricultural land in Rohi (Jungle) of their village Bannasar P.S. Pallu district Sri Ganganagar. This land of allotment has been shown by marks 1 and 4 in site plan Ex. P 3. They had sown Gawar crop in the po...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »