Rajasthan Court February 1987 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.
Gyasi S/O Raghunath Thakur and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-06-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)756
Gopal Krishna Sharma, J.1. This miscellaneous petition under Section 482, Cr. PC has been preferred against the order of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kama, by which he took cognizance against the petitioners under Sections 147, 323, 324, 341 and 504 read with section 149, IPC.2. Radhey Shyam lodged a written report against. 22 persons at the Police Station, Kama and the case under Sections 147, 323, 324 and 379, IPC was registered The First Information Report number is 145/86. The police investigated the matter and submitted challan against 13 persons only. The present petitioners were named in the First Information Report but the Police did not find any case even prima facie against these petitioners and hence no challan was submitted. The learned Magistrate after seeing the challan papers took cognizance against these petitioners and aggrieved by that order they have come to this Court.3. I have heard R.K. Soni, learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecu...
A.C. Traders Vs. Nawal Kishore
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj118; 1987(2)WLN375
ORDERNavin Chandra Sharma, J.1. This is a revision by the defendants against the order of the Additional District Judge, Barmer, dt/- Sept. 27, 1986, whereby in civil suit No. 9 of 1980 filed by the non-petitioner Nawal Kishor in its court for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 83,700/- as principal and 11,700/- as interest, in all Rs. 95,400/- instituted against the petitioners on the basis of an alleged Khata executed by petitioner 2 on behalf of the partnership firm petitioner 1 on April 2, 1985 after going through the accounts of various amounts alleged to have been advanced by plaintiff non-petitioner to the petitioner by various demand drafts dt/-June 18,1984andJune28, 1984. This suit was filed under Order XXXVII of Civil P.C. In accordance with Sub-rule (i) of Rule 3 of Order XXXVII, the plaintiff non-petitioner served upon the defendants-petitioners a copy of the plaint and annexures thereto together with the summons under Rule 2 of the said Order. The defendants-petitioners ente...
A.K. Allarakha Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: [1987]166ITR466(Raj)
1. In these reference cases, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'):'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that a sum of Rs. 16,758 received as interest from the Union Bank of India on Rs. 2,31,020, the amount received under the interim award given by the Rajasthan High Court, is taxable in the hands of the appellant ?'2. These references relate to the assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76.3. The facts, briefly stated, and as set out in the statement of the case, are that Firdose Manzil, a building belonging to the applicant, A.K. Allarakha (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') was acquired by the Government of Rajasthan under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act on March 13, 1965. The Land Acquisition Officer valued the said property for the purpose of compensation at...
Rseb Vs. Rambabu
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: 2(1989)WLN(Rev)434
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This is a defendants' revision against the appellate order holding that the suit is cognizable by a civil court. The trial court had upheld the defendants' objection that the suit can be tried only by a revenue court, but that view has been reversed in appeal by the District Court. Hence this revision by the defendants.2. Admittedly, the defendants' objection to the cognizance of the suit by a civil court is to be decided at this stage only on the basis of the plaint averments, since the trial has not proceeded further. Reading the plaint as a whole, the appellate court has rightly reached the conclusion that the suit is cognizable by a civil court and is not barred by virtue of Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act.3. The contention of the learned Advocate General appearing for the petitioners is that the reliefs claimed in the suit can be granted by a revenue court under Sections 91 and 92-A of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, and, therefore, its cognizance by virtue ...
Suresh Kumar and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN593
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 13-11-86 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi whereby the petitioners have been charged of the offence under Section 403 I.P.C. They have been discharged of the offence under Section 411 I.P.C. and under Section 110 of Land Customs Act under which the challan was presented. The charge is based on the statement of the Driver Iqbal, who has stated that the accused-petitioners told him that the silver was found by them so he may get the silver sold even in less price to which Iqbal refused.2. It may be mentioned that the Investigating Officer came into the possession of some documents which revealed that the silver bars were of the Firm Choksi Rikhab Chand Ratanlal of Palanpur, and the silver was sent to Swroopchand Naya Bazar, Ajmer, Rikhabchand has also lodged a report on 17-4-86 at 9 p.m. at Police-Station City Railway, Palanpur, stating that silver bars were sent through the petitioners Suresh Kumar an...
R.S.E.B. and ors. Vs. Rambabu and State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN24
Jagdish Sharan Verma, C.J.1. This is defendants' revision against the appellate order holding that the suit is cognizable by a civil court. The trial court had upheld the defendants' objection that the suit can be tried only by a revenue court, but that view has been reversed in appeal by the District Court. Hence this revision by the defendants.2. Admittedly, the defendants' objection to the cognizance of the suit by a civil court is to be decided at this stage only on the basis of the plaint averments, since the trial has not proceeded further. Reading the plaint as a whole, the appellate court has rightly reached the conclusion that the suit is cognizable by a civil court and is not barred by virtue of Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act.3. The contention of the learned Advocate General appearing for the petitioners is that the reliefs claimed in the suit can be granted by a revenue court under Section 91 and 92-A of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, and therefore its cognizance by a ...
Madan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN73
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.1. Under judgment dated September 12, 1978, learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer has convicted the accused-appellant under Section 304, Part-I and 448, IPC. Under the former count the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous-imprisonment for three years and under the second count he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Both the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. There is Jadugar Mohalla in Ajmer and in a house situated in that locality deceased Nandkishore used to reside in a part thereof. Some part of that house has been purchased from Nandkishore by the accused-appellant who was residing in that portion. Radhey Shyam PW 1 was a tenant of Nandkishore in that house. Sunil PW 8 is the sister's son of deceased Nandkishore. PW 1 Nemi Chand is brother of accused appellant and was residing with him. On March 31, 1978 at about 6.45 a. m. Sunil heard the cries of Nandkishore deceased, 'bachao bachao'. He re...
Smt. Ambika Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)227
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Smt. Ambika Devi has challenged the legality and correctness of the order of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan (for short 'the Tribunal') dated February 18, 1986.2. The averments in the writ petition are that the petitioner was serving as a Teacher at Gadra City in Tharparkar, District Sindh in erstwhile Province of Sindh. Because of partition she had to migrate to India and being a displaced person was registered as a refugee. She got the job of a Teacher in Jai Hind Sindhi Middle School, Gopalji-ka-Rasta, Jaipur, where she served from November 1,1951 to August 15, 1953. Thereafter vide order dated August 13, 1953 passed by the Deputy Inspector of School, she was appointed as a Teacher in the Government School, Barmer. On being relieved on August 15, 1953 from the Jai Hindi Sindhi Middle School, she went to Barmer and was directed to produce the medical certi...
Sharad Kumar Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)252
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner Sharat Kumar has prayed that the respondent Municipal Board, Sumerpur may be directed to regularise the services of the petitioner on the post of LDC with effect from 16-8-1979 and has further prayed that the Municipal Board may also be directed to fix him in the pay scale of LDC from the aforesaid date.2. The contention of the petitioner bereft of all unnecessary details is based on two grounds. The first ground is that one Sona Ram, who had also been appointed in the same manner as the petitioner and was junior to him, had already been fixed in the regular pay scale from 13-8-1985 where as the petitioner has not so been fixed His second contention is that he had been working as a LDC with the Municipal Board from 16-8-1979 and is entitled to the same pay scale as is applicable to other LDCs. Under new pay scales on the ground that the post cadred in the Rajasthan Municipal (Subordinate and Ministerial Service) Rules, bec...
Kailash Chand Bansal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN664
Gopal Krishan Sharma, J.1. Notice of this petition has been given to the State; and with the consent of both the learned Counsel, it is being finally disposed of at admission-stage.2. Kailash Chand has preferred this miscellaneous petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. against the order of ADJ No. 2, Bharatpur (camp at Bayana) dated 22nd Jan.,1987, by which, he maintained the order of the MJM, Weir, with some modification.3. Petitioner Kailash Chand booked his 120 bags of 'Urad' through Mini Transport Company for transportation from Indore to Delhi. That truck was seized by the Police of PS-Weir, on 16th Dec, 1986 alleging that the driver and the owner of the truck had Committed some offence. The bags of 'Urad' were also seized. When the petitioner moved the Magistrate, Weir, for delivering the goods to him on Supardginama, he passed the order dated 13th Jan., 1987, and ordered to deliver the goods on three conditions: the first condition was that the petitioner should produce a 'no objec...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »