Rajasthan Court October 1987 Judgments
Sardar Singh Vs. Prakash Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-30-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)89
Milap Chandra, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the defendant against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Sri Ganganagar by which he dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of the learned Additional Munsif, Sri Ganganagar, decreeing the suit for ejectment on the ground of reasonable and bonafide necessity.2. This appeal was admitted on 21-10-1985 on the following question of law, namely:Whether the suit for eviction on the ground of personal necessity from the shop in dispute could be entertained before the expiry of 5 years of the coming into force of new tenancy, which according to the defendant appellant came into existence on 7-1-1974?3. The defendant pleaded in his written statement that the plaintiff previously filed four suits for ejectment against him and other three tenants, a compromise was effected on 7-1-1974 amongst all the four tenants and the plaintiff one shop was vacated and its possession was given to the plaintiff, the rent of his ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhabhuti and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-30-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN643
G.K. Sharma, J.1. D.B. Cr. Appeal No. 287/85 is a Representative Appeal while D. B. Cr. Appeal No. 300/85 is Jail Appeal. As both these appeals are against the same judgment, so they are disposed of by this common judgment. The appellants have preferred these appeals against the judgment dated 23-5-1985 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur Camp Gangapur City convicting the appellants Bhabhuti under Section 302 IPC and Chotey under Section 302/34 IPC. Both these appellants have been sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo two months' R.I.2. Smt. Bitiya w/o deceased Narain Singh lodged a report on 15th November, 1983 at 5 p.m. at Police Station Mandrayal. According to this report Narain Singh was working in the agricultural field situated in village Tokeypura and was giving water in the field from the well. At that time Mst. Bitiya, her daughter Rambeti and her mother-in-law Anar Bai were also working there. At that time...
Tag this Judgment!Bagdaram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-29-1987
Reported in: 1989CriLJ414; 1987(2)WLN817
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. I have heard Mr. P. R. Chaudhary counsel for the appellant and Mr. S. K. Mathur Public Prosecutor in this appeal.2. Appellant Bagda Ram has been convicted under Section 323, I.P.C. and has been sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and with a fine of Rs. 500/-. It has been provided that in default of payment of fine, the appellant would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. An order was also passed under Section 428, Cr. P.C. that the period during which the appellant has been under detention during investigation, inquiry or trial before the date of conviction shall be set off against the term of imprisonment imposed on him on his conviction.3. It was contended by Mr. P. R. Chaudhary that the appellant has already suffered 18 months imprisonment during the trial and thus he should be ordered to be released. As against this, it was contended by the Pubic Prosecutor that the appellant has not deposited the fine of Rs. 500/- imposed upo...
Tag this Judgment!Bhairun Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-29-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN567
D.L. Mehta, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the judgment and sentence passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, dated 8th November, 1984, in Appeal No. 74 of 1979 whereby the learned Sessions Judge affirmed the conviction of the petitioner under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.2. The brief facts giving rise to this revision petition are that on 22nd December, 1976 the petitioner was taking two drums of milk. He was intercepted and checked by Shri Gopal Lal Saini, Food Inspector and 660 grams of she goat milk was taken by him as sample. It was divided into three equal parts and was packed in three fials, one fial was given to the petitioner. Sanction for the prosecution was also obtained. Public Analyst found the milk adulterated. Report of the Public Analyst is Ex. P 6. Public Analyst reported that the sample is adulterated by reason of abstraction of about 13% of its original fat. This report is dated 29th Januar...
Tag this Judgment!Sepoy Devidutt Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN299
S.S. Byas, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner challenges the validity and correctness of the order Annexure-1 dated April 3, 1987 passed by a Summary Court Martial. By the impuged order, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment in civil prison along with the dismissal from service.2. The material facts, which we have gathered with great difficulty from the return and the impugned order Annexure-1 are that the petitioner joined the Indian Army as Sepoy in 1980 and was working as Sahayak with one Colonel V.S. Budhwar of 16-Kumaon since 1981. At the relevant time, i.e. March and April 1987, he was working as the Sahayak of Colonel Budhwar at Jodhpur at his residence. Col. Budhwar was transferred from Jodhpur in December, 1986, but on account of education of his children, his wife and children stayed at Jodhpur for completing the academic year. At about 1.30 p.m. on February 24, 1987, the Colonel's wife Smt Indu...
Tag this Judgment!Jethu Vs. Devi and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN331
Milap Chandra, J.1. This second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree of Sri Fateh Chand Bansal, District Judge, Bhilwara, dated 14-7-1986, dismissing the appeal against the judgment of Shri B. L. Gupta Munsif, Shahpura, dated 9-7-1981, decreeing the suit for possession and recovery of Rs. 250/- as mesne profits. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal may be summarised thus.2. The plaintiff-respondents Nos. 1 and 2 filed a suit for the recovery of possession and mesne profits against the defendant-appellant Jethu and defendant respondent No. 3 Ladulal with the allegations, in short, that the suit property was initially owned and possessed by the defendant-appellant Jethu, on 30-8-1962 he sold it to the defendant-respondent Ladulal, he took it on rent from Ladulal and on 31-10-1973, he (Ladulal) sold it to the plaintiff-respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Despite several demands and notice, the possession of the suit property has not been delivered by the defendant Jethu...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Lali and ors. Vs. Guru Bux Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1987
Reported in: II(1990)ACC588
A.K. Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal against the award given by the Motor Vehicles Accident claims Tribunal, Udaipur dt. 7-8-82 in the claim case No. 73/79, whereby claim petition of the claimant has been dismissed.2. Aggrieved against this award dt. 7-8-82, claimants have filed the present appeal under Section 100-D, Motor Vehicles Act (herein-after referred as to 'The Act').3. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal arc that on 31.1.79 on Batewar Mangalwar Road, one vehicle No. R.S.M. 1387 whose owner was Guru Bux Singh and the same was being driven by Kishan Lal over run deceased Naru and thereafter it struck against the tree. Thus, it is alleged that the vehicle was driven in rash and negligent manner by the driver. Deceased Naru died on the spot itself. Naru was aged 40 years and spending 5,00/- rupees on the family. Therefore, claim of Rs. one lakh for the loss of the income and one Lakh for the mental agony i.e. two Lakh was filed before the Tribunal by heir of deceased. The vehic...
Tag this Judgment!Kishan Lal Vs. Tara Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-27-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)260
Narendra Mohan Kasliwal, J1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties on the main revision itself at their request. There is a defalut in the payment of rent only for one month i.e. for the mnoth of Nov., 1978. In this regard Mr. Maqbool Alam Advocate has filed an affidavit that he bad been the counsel in the civil suit No. 147/71 Ram Chander v Kishan Lal pending in the court of Munsiff, Jhalwar. One Abdul Majid was his registered clerk for about 15 years. In November/December, 1978 as usual, rent was entrusted to him to be deposited in the Treasury in respect of sereral ejectment cases. Mr. Alam has further deposed that it came to his notice that Abdul Majid did not deposit the rent from December, 1978 in the treasury and one of such case was Ramchander v. Kishan Lal. It has been further deposed that Abdul Majid left the office of Shri Alam toward the end of December, 1978/January, 1979 abruptly and money entrusted to Abdul Majid remained with him. An application under Section 5 has also...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ram Pyari Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-21-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj124
G.M. Lodha, Actg. C.J.1. 'Patrika', a prestigious daily news paper of Rajasthan, carried an important story on Sept. 10, 1985 under the caption 'Sainik ki patni 40 sal se pension ke liye bhatak rahi hai'. The story attracted the attention of one of us and as it was a case of denial of pension to a widow of . alleged Indian National Army Hawaldar, who laid down his life for the motherland in Azad Hind Fauz of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose for fighting the British Government, notice was taken by the Court on paper news only and it was treated as writ petition. Notices were issued to the various connected and concerned departments. The tragic tale and woeful story narrated by Smt. Rampyari relates back to the days when Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose formed the Azad Hind Fauz known as Indian National Army to obtain freedom of India by fighting British Government before independence in forties.2. In Burma there was confrontation of Indian National Army with the British Army fighters and in actio...
Tag this Judgment!Bihari Dan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-21-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)16
S.S. Byas, J.1. Accused Biharidan was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur by his judgment dated November 11, 1976. The accused has come-up in appeal and challenges his conviction.2. The prosecution case is short and simple and may, briefly, be summarised as under:PW6 Smt. Ucchabkanwar is the daughter of the accused and the wife of PW 2 Fatehdan. The appellant has one more daughter Smt. Bhanwari Devi (Co-accused, acquitted by the trial court), who was married to Khetdan. The appellant had a son Devidan. PW 2 Fatehdan had a sister Sagar Kanwar, who was married to Devidan. A couple of months before October, 1975, Devidan passed away. The appellant's wife Smt. Chandra (also co-accused and acquitted by the trial court) took Sagar Kanwar to an unfortunate person and held her ill-luck as responsible for the death of Devidan. The relations between Smt. Chandra and Sagar Kanwar became strained and despite that Sagar Kanwa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »