Rajasthan Court March 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.
Sarjoo Das Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-07-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)243
Jas Raj Chopra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated January 17, 1981 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sirohi, whereby the learned lower court has convicted the accused-appellant Sarjoo Das under Section 302 IPC and has sentenced him to imprisonment for life together with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default, to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal briefly stated are; that Sarjoo Das was married to one Kamla, daughter of deceased Bajrangdas. It is alleged that Kamla and her three sisters were married on the same day about four years before the occurrence. However, Kamla alone took her Gona and lived with her in laws for about two years but later, some allegations were made against her that she was carrying on with her father-in-law and, therefore, she came to her father's house at village Nimbaj. After about 15-20 days of this, accused Sarjoodas came to take her back but she refused to accompany him whereupo...
Prakash Chandra and ors. Vs. the Oriental Fire and General Insurance C ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-07-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC152
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, has been filed against the judgment dated February 7, 1985 of the learned single Judge, which he passed in an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act')2. It is not necessary to re-state the facts in detail, for, they have elaborately been stated in the judgment under appeal. Suffice it to state that respondents No. 2 and 3 filed a claim against appellants No. 1 and 2 and Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited, Udaipur (respondent No. 1) under Section 110-A of the Act. Their claim was for Rs. 1,22,000/-. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udaipur ('the Tribunal') by its award dated March 10, 1978, allowed the claim to the extent of Rs. 4000/- each set of the claimants with proportionate costs. Aggrieved, the claimants filed an appeal under Section 110-D against the respondents. The learned single Judge allowed the appeal and ordered...
Dau Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-07-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)659
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. This revision has been filed by ten petitioners, who have been convicted under Sections 323, 147 and 448 IPC and sentenced to one month's S.I. Under each count by the learned Munsif and Judl. Magistrate, Bhim and whose appeal has been dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rajsamand.2. The only contention raised before me by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Munsif and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge did not exercise their discretion properly in refusing probation to the petitioners. The offences are very minor. The accused are not said to be previous convicts and the incident also appears to have taken place due to very trivial reasons. The injuries suffered by three injured persons are very minor. Looking to these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the contention of the learned Counsel deserves to be accepted. The only reason given by the learned Courts below is t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Golecha Firms (P.) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1986
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(Raj)12; [1987]164ITR753(Raj)
G.K. Sharma, J. 1. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur, has filed this reference application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, arising out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, dated April 18, 1980.2. The assessee, M/s. Golecha Firms (P.) Ltd., Beawar, was a private limited company. They filed a return declaring a loss of Rs. 560 for the assessment year 1978-79. The assessee-company was incorporated in order to acquire land for dairy and farming. It could not carry out any of the activities in the said business. The surplus money lying with it had been deposited with the firm, M/s. Ashoka Minerals, Beawar, and the interest accruing from it was shown in the profit and loss account, claiming the same to be income from business.3. The Income-tax Officer did not agree with the assessee and was of the view that the assessee's business was not that of money-lending, although one of the objects was to lend and advance money on property, etc. The Income-tax Offi...
Vishwa Niwas Mishra Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1986
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN776
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.1. The only question involved in this writ petition is as to whether before refusing to renew the licence to hold the post of 'A' class guide at the Observatory, Director of Archaeology and Museum, Rajasthan Jaipur should have afforded an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or not. There is no dispute that the licence for guiding the tourists was issued by the Director of Archaeology and Museums, Rajasthan Jaipur to the petitioner after holding interview of the persons who desired to get a licence. The licence issued is a permission for guiding the tourists inside the protected monuments. The licence was issued in favour of the petitioner Vishwa Niwas Mishra by the Director, Archaeology and Museums, Rajasthan and was to expire on 31st December, 1984. The petitioner applied for renewal of licence on December, 31, 1984 and moved an application to the Director, Archaeology and Museum Rajasthan. As per the procedure, the applicant should have moved his a...
Surja Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)676a
Mahendra Bhusan Sharma, J.1. This bail application has been filed on the ground that other accused, whose case is not better than the accused-petitioners, were released on bail by a learned Judge of this Court sitting singly and therefore not with standing the fact that this Court had dismissed the bail application of the accused petitioners, in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2422/1985, Narsa v. State, bail should be allowed to the present accused-petitioners also. It may be stated here that earlier S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application (No. 2422/85) came before me for hearing. I had allowed bail to Narsa on the ground of age and disallowed bail to the accused petitioners on merits after taking into consideration the multiple injuries sustained by deceased Ranjit on vital parts of the body. I also took into consideration the injuries sufferred by accused-persons which were superficial in nature. But after the aforesaid order was made by me, two bail applications were moved in ...
Dhanna Ram and anr. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1986
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN456
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. The dispute relates to the delivery of truck No. RJV 4641 One Gumana Ram, non-petioner No. 2 entered into higher purchase agreement with the Rajasthan Financial Corporation for the purchase of the above truck and the Rajathan Financial Corporation had advanced a loan of Rs. 1,67,434/- The said Gumanaram sold the said truck to Dhahnaram and Lichama Ram and Gumanaram received a sum of Rs. 53,566/- from Dhannaram and Lichama Ram and it was agreed between the parties that Dhanna Ram and Lichama shall pay the instalments to the Rajasthan Financial Corporation and Gumanaram shall have no right what so ever so far as the truck is concerned. In case, of default of payment of instalments of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation by Dhannaram, and Lichama Ram, Gumanaram was given a right to seize the truck After the said agreement and sale of the truck in favour of Dhannaram and Lichama Ram; they paid a sum of Rs. 81,200/- to the Rajasthan Financial Corporation as instalme...
Mangal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1986
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN101
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated May 21, 1985 passed by the learned Munsif City, Jodhpur whereby the application filed by the respondent No. 3 Harisingh under Order 1, Rule 10 CPC was allowed.2. The facts may briefly be stated that the petitioner was the tenant of one Shri Shersingh, who had expired. The respondent No. 3 is one of the sons of the deceased Shersingh. The petitioner moved an application before the City Magistrate Jodhpur for obtaining water connection but his application was rejected and his appeal was also dismissed by the District Magistrate, Jodhpur as petitioner failed to produce no objection certificate from his landlord. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the suit impleading the State of Rajasthan and Assistant Engineer (City Division-II), Water Works Department Jodhpur as defendants. He also submitted an application on which amenity of water connection was restored. At that stage, the respondent No. 3 submitted an application ...
Municipal Council Vs. Rameshwar Prasad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN685
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This is an appeal by the Municipal Council Kota against the judgment of the trial court where by the respondent was acquitted of the offence under Section 2(1)(A) and Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act on the ground that on June 20, 1973 Shriram Colony, where the respondent was found selling Chilli powder was not with in the limits of the Municipal Council Kota.2. The short point argued by Shri K.K. Mahrish the learned council for the Municipal Council, Kota, relates to the inclusion of the village Raipur in Kota Municipality area, Shriram colony where the accused-respondent was apprehended, is said to be in village Raipur. The trial court acquitted the accused on the ground that village Raipur was brought in the limits of the Municipality, Kota by the validating Act 1975 of Kota Municipal limits.3. Shri Prem Asopa has appeared to oppose this appeal.4. It is obvious now that so far as the village Raipura is concerned, it was in Municipality vi...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Babu S/O Soma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)232
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. By this judgment dated April 3, 1984 the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sirohi acquitted accused Babu of the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 404, I.P.C. The State, by leave, has come-up in appeal and challenges the acquittal.2. The prosecution case is short and simple. On August 28, 1982, Bhudaram Rebari, a young boy of 15 years, took his live-stock for grazing in the jungle in Mauja Derna. He was wearing gold Murkiyan (Article 2), silver Mathlies (Article 3) and silver Bedi (Article 4) when he left the house. PW 2 Dalla, aged about 20 years and PW 3 Ratna, aged about 14 years, also residents of Derna, took their cattle for grazing in the same jungle. In the noon, one unkown person (Later on identified as the accused Babu) came to PW 2 Dalla and asked him to give Roti (loaf) to him. PW 2 Dalla did not oblige him. That man then went to Bhudaram, who was nearly 50 paces away from PW 2 Dalla. PW 2 Dalla took his cattle behind the hill. After sometime, PW 3...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »