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.
Raj Kumar and anr. Vs. Lal Chand and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN962
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. The plaintiff petitioners filed a suit for eviction against the non-petitioners on 2-11-1982, and according to him the rent from 1-1-1981 to 31-12-1982 had not been paid. The rate was Rs. 11/-p.m. On 15-3-1984, the trial court viz. M.J.M. Chirawa, passed an order, which may be said to be an order under Section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act (here in after referred to as the Act). By this order, he has made the following directions-(1) Rent at rate of Rs. 11/-p.m. till the date of filing of the suit be deposited within 15 days;(2) The rent after this period and uptill 1-3-1934, be deposited within one month;(3) Thereafter rent be deposited by the first of every month.2. It was also ordered that if any rent had been deposited then it was not necessary to deposit again. On the objection of the counsel for the defendant, this order was immediately modified and the rent of future-months was allowed to be deposited by the 15th of the ne...
Mukhtiar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)279
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge Sri Ganganagar dated 22-9-1976 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused appellant under Sections 302 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and three years rigorous imprisonment respectively. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that the accused appellant Mukhtiar Singh fired a gun shot at Dayal singh and caused his death on 24-12-1974 in village Butra in front of the house of Gurditia singh PW 1. A First Information Report of this incident was riled by Gurditia Singh PW 1 at 2 p.m. at police station Ghamur wali. It is alleged that when he came to his house from his field he saw Hakam singh standing in the main door of his house with a gun and saw that a dead body was lying in front of his house behind Kakam singh. The dead body was bleeding from the chest and abdomen. He asked Ha...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Satnam Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)313
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This is a State appeal against the acquittal of the accused respondent under Sections 302 and 394 IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar vide his judgment dated 26-4-1967.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that a FIR was filed by Hirasingh, grand father of the accused Satnamsingh to the effect that on 11-12-1974 Satnamsingh came at about 10 p.m. and he knocked the door but he was in a drunken condition, therefore, he did not open the door. But his grand-son Shersingh opened the door and brought Satnamsingh in the house. Satnamsingh slept in the night but he did not get up in the morning at usual. Therefore he went to the place of sleeping and removed his quilt. On removing his quilt he found that his payjama and shirt were blood stained. He also called his son Jogendrasingh & thereafter both of them asked Satnam Singh as to how his clothes were blood stained. Satnamsingh told them that he and one Ramchander S/o Banwarilal Jat had a quarrel wit...
Hukam Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)297
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal against (he judgment of conviction by the accused appellant. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 1, Hanumangarh vide his judgment dated 23-12-1980 has convicted the accused appellants under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment. He has also convicted all the four accused appellants under Section 450 IPC and sentenced them to 7 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment. Accused appellant Sahab Singh was also convicted under Section 323, IPC and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that PW 1 Jeet Kaur wife of deceased Dilipsingh filed a First Information Report at police station Sangaria on 10-7-1979 at 5 a.m. It was disclosed by her in the First Information Report that deceased Dilipsingh and accused...
Nand Lal and ors. Vs. Purshottam and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj26; 1987(2)WLN818
ORDERMrs. Mohini Kapur, J. 1. In this revision petition an important point of law is involved which is whether an appellate court has power under Order 41 Rules 23, 23-A and 25 C.P.C., to pass an order remanding a miscellaneous application for fresh decision. In other words it is to be seen whether Section 141 CPC can be invoked to make the power of remand applicable to matters, arising in the course of a regular Suit.2. The facts of the case may be stated briefly at this stage. The non-petitioner plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction in the court of Munsiff Magistrate, Fatehpur. Along with the plaint, they also filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking a relief that the applicants be restrained from obstructing them from the use of chaubara and other premises. It may also be mentioned that the parties to the suit are related to each other and there was some dispute as to whether the property in dispute was ancestral property or individual property and who...
State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Sadhu Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN450
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. We have two matters before us, namely, the appeal of the State against the acquittal and the application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. of the Investigating Officer for expunging certain remarks made against him and since both the matters arise out of one and the same judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated February 13, 1976, they were heard together and are decided by a common judgment. By the impugned judgment, the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the six accused-respondents Sadhu Singh, Indra Singh, Chand Singh, Mala Singh, Hansa Singh and Harbans Singh of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 440, 436, 150 and 148, I.P.C.2. Briefly staled, the prosecution case is that PW 1 Bakhtawar Singh Jat-Sikh was living with his wife Mst. Harnam Kaur and son Hari Singh in a hut which he had raised in a field situate in Rohi 7-BNW, P.S. Sadar Kotwali. Ganganagar. Bakhtawar Singh has one more son PW 2 Atma Singh, who lives in ...
Hariya and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)431
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalore dated 30-8-1976 whereby he has convicted the accused appellants under Sections 302, 392 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced under Section 302/34 IPC to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months; under Section 392/34 IPC to five years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2000/-and in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for 3 months and under Section 201/34 IPC to 3 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that on 17-2-1976 at 8 P.M. Lachharam son of Samela by caste Rebari resident of village Todami informed Shri Mehboobkhan Sub Inspector of Police, St...
Ram Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)391
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and conviction of the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar dated 30-8-1976 where by he has sentenced the accused appellants to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that a First Information Report was filed by one Govinda on 4-11-1975 at about 11-15 a.m. at police station, Sikar that today i.e. 4-11-1975 at about 5 a.m. in village Sanvloda he was informed by Birda son of Surja Balai in the early morning at about 5 a.m. that Chandra son of Natha was thrown in the well by Ram Singh and Bhag Singh sons of Chain Singh and he has been killed. On the basis of this report, a case under Section 302 IPC was registered against both the accused persons Thereafter, investigation was taken up by the police and the Investigating Officer reache...
J.D.A., Jaipur Vs. Mirchoo Mal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj31; [1990(60)FLR81]; 1987(2)WLN491
ORDERI.S. Israni, J.1. This is a revision petition under Section 115 CPC against the order of learned Additional Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Jaipur City, dated 28-2-84 in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2/84(8/84) whereby the order of the learned Additional Munsiff (West) Jaipur City dated 15-12-1983 was reversed and temporary injunction in favour of the non-petitioner was granted.2. I have heard Mr. S. M. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. L Badhdar, learned counsel for the non-petitioners.3. Mr. Mehta states that plot No. D-16 situated in Kalwad Scheme, Jhotware, Jaipur was auctioned on 29-1-1973. The non-petitioner was the highest bidder and his bid for Rs. 24086.48P. was accepted. 1/4th amount of the auction price was deposited on the spot and as per the conditions of auction, 3/4th of the amount was to be deposited by him within 30 days from the date of confirmation of auction. The auction was confirmed in favour of the non-petitioner on 5th Fe...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Shiv Ratan Mohta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC407(Raj)
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This is a revision against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 22nd September, 1972 by virtue of newly substituted Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 as amended by the Amendment Act, 1984.2. The only point for decision is, whether the aluminium paint used for painting the electric poles which are required for distribution of electric power is entitled to the concessional rate of sales tax at 3 per cent as claimed by the assessee instead of the rate of 10 per cent applicable to entry No. 63 relied on by the department. Entry No. 63 reads as under:63. Dyes, paints and varnishes, glue, polish, paint brush, sandpaper, turpentine oil, enamels and white oil.3. Reliance was placed by the assessee on the concessional rate by virtue of a notification which reads as under :S. No. 63C: F. 5(110)FD/RT/63 dated 15th July, 1963.-In exercise of the powers conferred by the second proviso to Section 5 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (Rajasthan Act 29 of 1954), t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »