Rajasthan Court March 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.
Arora Finance Company, Tonk and ors. Vs. Nazeer Ahmed
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj220
Farooq Hasan, J.1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dt. 14-12-79 passed by District Judge, Tonk (first appellate Court') affirming the judgment and decree dt. 30-8-70 passed by the Civil Judge, Tonk (trial Court') in a suit for recovery of Rs. 5,9007-.2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the plaintiff-appellants filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 5900/- against the defendant, with Rs. 3,500/- on 16-2-73 on interest at Re. 1/- per cent per month from plaintiff 2, partner of the firm-plaintiff a pronote and receipt for the same is also alleged to have been executed by the defendant. Besides this, the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 26007-on the basis of another pronote and receipt from the plaintiff firm on 8-8-74.3. The defendant in his written statement admitted to have borrowed the money but the amount of loan was shown different by the defendant. The defendant further pleaded that the plaintiff-appellants are money lenders within the definiti...
Harvansh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: 1989WLN(UC)484
G.M. Lodha, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge No, 1 Alwar upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court.2. One Girja prasad Head Master, Govt. Primary School Tehadpur lodged a written FIR at police station Vijay Mandir on 29-7 1972 alleging therein that on 28-7-1985 at 12.30 A.M. when he was in the school the petitioner Harvansh entered into the class threw the chair and desk and took. out Rs. 60 from the pocket of the complainant. The petitioner also alleged to have bad thrown ink on the clothes of the complainant and that the accused was drunk at that time. After investigation the accused was challaned under Section 353 IPC. The evidence was recorded and he has been convicted for offence under Section 353 IPC.3. Before this court when the matter came up for admission the Hon'ble Judge who has admitted the case issue notice of enhancement on the ground that the circumstances of the case were such that it require...
MusddIn and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN359
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.1. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kishangarhbas, Alwar under his judgment dated January 27, 1987 while maintaining the conviction of each of the accused petitioner under Section 394 I.P.C. reduced the sentence of each of them from 4 years and 6 months RI and fine of Rs. 1,000/- to 3 years RI and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment sentenced each of them to further suffer 3 months RI.2. Generally this court does not interfere in revision in the findings arrived at by the appellate Court as well as by the trial court, but in the instant case, so far as the accused petitioners Shamsuddin s/o Murad and Habib are concerned, their complicity in the crime is not proved beyond doubt and the finding that they committed an offence under Section 394, I.P.C. appears to be perverse.3. Sukhvir Singh PW 3 along with his master Mahesh Kumar PW 4 on November 14, 1985 had gone by Scooter No. RNI 3642 from Khairthal to Alwar to make recoveries of various dues....
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. U.i.T.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)699
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This criminal revision petition under section 379 read with Section 401 Cr. PC against the judgment of leared Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City Jaipur Criminal Appeal No. 48 of 1981 dated 5th October, 1981 whereby he affirmed the judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1 Jaipur City, Jaipur in case No. 2308 of 1975 dated 30-3-1981.2. The complainant is U.I.T. and the offence with the accused is charged of making construction without obtaining permission in an area which is covered by number of schemes of the U.I.T.3. During the course of the arguments, in this court, it was pointed out by Mr. A.K. Sharma that the so called approved scheme was never produced. Mr. Kamlakar Sharma counsel for the non-petitioner in reply to the above subsmision submitted that a letter was prodaced showing that the scheme was approved and number has been given and these numbers have found place in the judgment of the appellate court.4. It is true that the number and date h...
Dharamichand Vs. Smt. Sobha Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Raj159; 1987(1)WLN637
ORDERNavin Chandra Sharma, J. 1. Dharmichand husband who has petitioned for the divorce of his wife Smt. Sobha has come in revision against the order of the District Judge, Pali dated April 24, 1986 whereby the said Judge has awarded to the wife alimony, pendente lite the petition for divorce at Rs. 300/- per month from January 8. 1986.2. Husband's case is that he is employed as a Munim with M/s Birdhi Chand Champalal and he is getting only a salary of Rule 400/- per month and the amount of alimony pendente lite awarded by the District Judge is not only high but has been arbitrarily fixed. With regard to the expenses of litigation, it has been contended that the wife has already been paid a total amount of Rs. 1350/- for that and no further direction for awarding of more amount is warranted.3. Wife's contention on the other hand, is that father of Dharmichand carried on Kirana business under the name and style of M/s. Anand Vastu Bhandar and the husband admittedly is joint with his fat...
Registrar of Companies Vs. Jaipur Stock Exchange Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1987
Reported in: [1987]62CompCas433(Raj)
P.C. Jain, J. 1. In this petition, under Section 439(5) read with Section 433(c) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, the Registrar of Companies as a petitioner has prayed that the respondent, M/s. Jaipur Stock Exchange Ltd., Jaipur, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, be ordered to be wound up by this court.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass and may be stated thus : The respondent company was incorporated on December 28, 1983, as a company limited by guarantee having no share capital. It is alleged that since the date of incorporation, the respondent company had not commenced its main business of stock exchange within a year from the date of its incorporation for which the company was formed. It is also alleged that the company has failed to obtain permission from the Stock Exchange Division, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, as required by the provisions of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act. The petitioner alleged that he had ...
Nathu Lal Vs. Mool Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN47
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. Moiety of a shop situated near old Police Kotwali in Deogarh was owned by Shri Rikhab Dass and rest moiety was owned by Gulab Chand and his sons Tara Chand and Nemi Chand. Mohan Lal son of Harak Chand, deceased (and now represented by respondents Nos. 1/1 and 1/2) by way of Civil Suit No. 312 of 19 & 5 instituted on July 5, 1965 against the appellant and respondents Nos. 2 to 12 in the court of Munsif, Bheem, which was later on transferred to the Court of Munsif, Rajsamand, prayed for a decree of redemption and delivery of possession of the moiety of the shop as successor in interest of Rikhab Dass which was alleged to have been usufructuarily mortgaged by Rikhab Das and his sons with Gulab Chand and his sons Tara Chand and Nemi Chand on Miti Bhadva Budi 9 Samwat Year 1948 corresponding to the year 1891 AD Mohan Lal and respondent Nos. 2 to 9 were surviving legal representatives of the mortgagors. The appellant Nathu Lal and respondents Nos. 10, 11 and 12 are...
Mahesh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN87
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. In compliance of the judgment the office has sent letters with copies of judgment for necessary action on 20th February, 1987 to Director, Social Welfare Department of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Director Medical and Health Jaipur, the Chief Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan Jaipur, the District and Sessions Judge, Dholpur, the Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan, Medical and Health Department, Jaipur, the District Magistrate Alwar, the District Magistrate, Dholpur. However, none of them have responded so far. Shri Purohit, learned Public Prosecutor has mentioned that some effective steps may be taken as there has been one more incident of the same nature in Dholpur District during last week.2. It has been directed in the above judgment that medical aid to all these victims should be provided by bearing the expenditure of Rs. 10,000/-in each case by the State. This should be done by giving best possible surgical treatment to the victims for reviving their eye s...
Roshan Lal Tiwari Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: 1989WLN(UC)446
G.M. Lodha, J.1. An unusual interesting case of the Prosecutor becoming the accused, for cheating and corruption offence, the total amount analysed being Rs. 33.50 has come to lime light in the criminal revision petitions filed under Section 397, Cr.P.C. by petitioner Roshan Lal. The amount of Rs. 33.50 again is spread over in two years 1978 and 1979 as it is alleged that on 9-1-1978 the petitioner drew travelling allowance of Rs. 6.00 as rickshaw charges and Rs. 8.00 as daily allowances. On 12-4-1979 travelling allowances drawn is Rs. 8.00 with Rs. 11.00 as daily allowances and; this makes the total amount of Rs. 33.50.2. Surprisingly enough this corruption and cheating as alleged by the prosecution was detected and discovered in the year 1981 when First Information Report was lodged, by one Shyam Lal, Reader of the court in which the accused was Assistant Public Prosecutor. Investigation followed. The modus operand of the investigation was search and research of the order sheets in w...
Ramdhan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN421
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. Since these two appeals: one by the appellant Ramdhan and the other by the appellants Sohan Lal, Prithviraj and Ramswaroop. are directed against one and the same judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Ganganagar dated October 30, 1976, they were heard together and are decided by a common judgment. By the impugned judgment, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted accused Ramswaroop under Sections 302, 307 and 307/34, accused Ramdhan under Sections 302/34, 307 and 307/34, I.P.C. and the remaining two Prithviraj and Sohan Lal under Sections 302/34, 307/34 and 307/34-109, I.P.C. and sentenced them to various terms, the longest being the imprisonment for life under Sections 302 or 302-34-109, I.P.C.2. Put briefly, the prosecution case is that PW 4 Maniram, PW 6 Rampratap and the appellant Sohan Lal are real brothers and reside in 5-C Chhoti Police Station Mathili Rathan district Ganganagar. The deceased-victim Khetpal. aged about 20 years, was the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »