Rajasthan Court August 1987 Judgments
Citizens of Bundi and ors. Vs. Municipal Board, Bundi and ors., Etc.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj132; 1987(2)WLN948
G.M. Lodha, J. 1. Peoples development through ensuring 'environmental purity' public parks, chowks, chogans, play grounds wide streets, roads, squares, and public open spaces for community gardens, physical exercises, games, festivals, meetings, functions are to be safeguarded for perpetual public use and making them inalienable. Safeguards for them contained in constitutional mandates of Articles 47, 48 and 51 and Municipal, U.I.T. Panchayat and easementary laws, whether to be undermined and scrapped for commercial benefits of colonisers, housing societies and even Municipalities or state authorities, is the pivot of legal debate in this 'public interest litigation'.2. These are three connected appeals Nos. 156/80, 171/80 and 206/80 in which the enlightened citizens of Bundi in widen public interest for protecting a public park area of the city of Bundi, have filed these suits. The Municipal Board started auctioning the plots out of the public park for construction of shops as a comme...
Tag this Judgment!Ballabh Das Vs. Rajesh Chand Gupta and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN778
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 31st March, 1978, passed by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City, dismissing the suit of the appellant for the recovery of Rs. 20,563/-.2. The facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass. The plaintiff appellant advanced a sum of Rs. 18,000/- on 1-4-1968, for which a pronote and receipt was executed by respondent No. 1. This pronote describes the borrower as Rajesh Chand Gupta s/o Harish Chandra Gupta, c/o Delhi Sanitary Stores, Choura Rasta Jaipur. The pronote has been signed by Rajesh Chand Gupta without specifying as to the capacity in which he has put his signatures. On 8-6-1969, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- was paid towards the loan by Rajesh Chand Gupta and he made an endorsement to this effect on the reverse of the pronote. The allegation of the plaintiff appellant was that the money had been obtained by Rajesh Chand Gupta in his capacity as partner of M/s Delhi Sanitary Stores, and thi...
Tag this Judgment!Bashir Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)635
Narendra Mohan Kasliwal, J.1. This revision by the accused Bashir is directed against his conviction under Section 497 IPC and sentence of six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.2. Prosecution story in brief is that Mst. Hamida was a legally married wife of Mohammed PW 1 resident of village Milwada, Tehsil Jhalra-patan. The parties were married some where in the year 1970 in village Dhanoda. When Mohammed went to bring his wife Hamida then the accused Bashir told that Hamida was no more his (Mohammed's) wife and also told that Hamida was now his (Bashir's) wife. A complaint was thus lodged against Bashir & Hamida for offences under Sections 497 & 494, IPC. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Jhalawar by his jugdment dated July 7, 1981, convicted Hamida under Section 494 IPC and sentenced to 9 months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- while accused Bashir was convicted under S...
Tag this Judgment!Jagal Singh Vs. Bal Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1987
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ89Raj; 1987(2)WLN588
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This is an employer's revision arising out of a claim made by a workman under Section 15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The workman's claim was allowed by the Authority under the Payment of 'Wages Act and total sum of Rs. 6,375/- was awarded. The learned District Judge has affirmed that order in appeal. Hence this revision.2. The amount of Rs. 6,375/- awarded to the workman comprises of Rs. 2,730/-as pay; Rs. 2,730/- a over-time wages; Rs. 390/- as wages for the weekly day of rest; Rs. 500/- as compensation and Rs. 25/- a costs. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenges only the award of Rs. 2,730/-over-time wages and Rs. 390/- as wages for the weekly day of rest. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel on clause (5) of Rule 23 and Clause (3) of Rule 24-A of the Rajasthan Minimum Wages Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') in support of the contention that the wages for over-time and for the wee...
Tag this Judgment!Chela and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN345
S.S. Byas, J.1. Since the both the appeals are directed against one and same judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore dated 11-1-82, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment. By the impugned judgment, (1) accused Chela was convicted under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/-, (2) accused Gena was convicted under Section 326, IPC and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/-; and (3) accused Mala and Gulaba were convicted under Section 323, IPC, but instead of being at once sentenced to any punishment, were released on probation of good conduct. Accused Gena, Mala and Gulaba were acquitted of the offence under Section 302/34, IPC. Accused Chela and Gena have come-up in appeal and challenged their conviction. Aggrieved against the judgment of the acquittal of Gena, Mala and Gulaba from the offence. Under Section 302/34, IPC. The State has, also, come-up in appeal.2. The prosecution case ...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Kishan Alias Munna Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)451
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner after notice to the Public Prosecutor.2. The petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 25 Arms Act and has been sentenced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. His conviction and sentence has been upheld in the appeal by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Hence this revision.3. The offence under Section 25 Arms Act is well proved on the basis of the testimony of the Investigating Officer. In this case a pistol and two live cartridges were recovered on the information of the accused from the house, which was in his possession. The petitioner has therefore, been rightly convicted even on the sole testimony of the Station House Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has faced trial for about 8 years and the petitioner has remained in custody and served out some senten...
Tag this Judgment!Naraina Nand Vs. Mahant Ramdas and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)453
Jagdish Sharan Verma, C.J.1. This is a revision by the defendent against dismissal of several applications made by the defendant raising certain objections to maintainability of the suit as well as the adequacy of the Court fees paid by the plaintiff. These applications have been rejected by the trial Court. Hence this revision.2. Admittedly the defendant has not yet filed the written statement and these objections have been raised merely by filing some applications without filing the written statement. It is obvious that even the objections relating to the maintainability of the suit have to be raised in the pleading contained in the written statement, on the basis of which such objections have to be treated as preliminary issues in the suit. There is no occasion to permit such objections being raised without filing the written statement. In my opinion the revision should be dismissed on this short ground alone. It would be open to the defendant to raise all the objections available t...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Waheed Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)456
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. The petitioner' was appointed as Naka-guard vide Order Ex. 1 dated November 20, 1985 on the death of his father under the provisions of the Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying while in Service Rules, 1975 (for short the Rules' here in after). He worked on that post up to September 24, 1986 and on that date the Order Ex. 2 terminating his service was issued. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the termination of his services has-appoached this Court by filing the petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Mr. Kamal Joshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that petitioner's father had expired on November 10, 1985 and the post of Naka Guard which he was holding fell vacant. Then consequently, petitioner got the appointment as of right under the Rules. It has been urged that the persons who were not legally appointed on such posts were retained while the services of the petitioner despite his being entitled to...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Raja Bai and ors. Vs. Mohan Lal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)473
Jagdish Sharan Verma, C.J.1. Respondent No. 1 Mohan Lal who is the judgment debtor has died and by an earlier order dated 5-8-1987 it was held that this revision has abated against him, since his legal representatives have not been impleaded. The result is that the judgment-debtor or his Legal representatives are not a party to this revision filed by the auction purchaser and the only surviving respondent is the decree-holder. For this reason alone this revision has to be dismissed. It is dismissed accordingly. No costs....
Tag this Judgment!Omshanti Paramhans Deo Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-28-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)452
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner after notice to the Public Prosecutor.2. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 147, 447, 427/34, IPC and has ordered issue of proceess. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant has filed a false complaint and has abused the process of the court by producing false witnesses and getting the case registered and prosess issued. He urged that a revenue case under Section 188 Tenancy Act was filed by the petitioner Omshanti Paramhans Dev against the complainant Brij Kishore for permanent injunction. That suit was decreed on 17-4-1985 and that decree had become final. It has been found in that suit that the plaintiff Omshanti Parmhans was in the cultivatory possession of khasra No. 950/- measuring one Bigha and the defendant Brij Kishore was threatening to dispossess the plaintiff. All the issues arising in the suit were found in favour of the pla...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »