Rajasthan Court September 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.
Virendra Kumar Vs. Smt. Santoshi Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj127; 1988(1)WLN25
I.S. Israni, J.1. This D. B. Civil Misc. Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed against the judgment dt. 18-9-86 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Jaipur in Civil Suit No. 422/86. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the respondent in the Court of learned District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur. The appellant husband has denied the factum of marriage with the respondent. An application filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed by the trial Court. Against this an appeal was filed before the learned single Judge of this Court which was accepted and after setting aside the order of the trial Court, the matter was remanded back for retrial in the light of observations made in it. The appellant filed a special appeal against the decision of learned single Judge which has also been dismissed by this Court.2. In the me...
Bhaiya Ram Vs. Ram Chandra
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN508
J.R. Chopra, J.1. The revision petition was argued on merits at the admission stage.2. The contention of Mr. Parihar is that he is free to value his relief in what ever manner he likes and that was not the stage at which it should be decided whether the suit is triable by that Court or not. He tried to argue that even if the reliefs are separately valued, one relief may be the main relief and the other may only be an ancillary relief. This contention of Mr. Parihar is beside the point, because this Court or for that matter, the learned lower court was not called upon to decide whether on valuing the reliefs separately, the suit will remain triable by that Court or not. In deciding an application filed under Order 6, Rule 17, CPC the Court has only to consider whether the application is entertainable if accepted whether and it will cause any prejudice to the opposite party, which may not be capable of being compensated be awarding costs. That is only the scope of the decision of an appl...
Usha Rani and ors. Vs. Indermal and Sons and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj223; 1988(2)WLN172
ORDERM.B. Sharma, J.1. The revision petition has been filed against the order dt. Oct. 15, 1982, of the learned Additional District Judge No. 1 Alwar. Under the aforesaid order the learned Addl. District Judge allowed the application by the defendant non-petitioners under Section 10 of the Civil P.C. and further proceedings in the case were stayed during the decision of Civil Suit No. 28/80.2. The petitioners filed a suit in the Court of learned District Judge, Alwar in which a prayer was made for dissolution of firm and for accounts of the firm since Oct. 18,1979 to April 30, 1980 and also thereafter. The aforesaid suit was filed against the non-petitioners 1 to 3. An application for appointment of Receiver was also filed under Order 40, R. 1, C.P.C. In that suit on behalf of the non-petitioners 2 and 3 an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act 1940 (for short, the Act) was filed praying that the proceedings in the suit be stayed. That application was contested on behalf ...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Sah Roop Narain
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1987
Reported in: [1988]169ITR794(Raj)
J.S. Verma, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the Commissioner for decision of the following questions of law, namely : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the execution of the release deed in question is a unilateral act and as such, it is not a transfer within the meaning of Section 2(xxiv) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the execution of the release deed in question is not a gift within the meaning of Section 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the release deed in question is a bonafide one and as such, it is not hit by Section 4(1)(c) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958?' 2. The relevant assessment year is ...
State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and anr. Vs. S.K. Sen Gupta and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN420
J.S. Verma, C.J.,1. This appeal is against the judgment dated February 5, 1981 by a learned Single Judge of this Court allowing the writ petition of S.K. Sen Gupta claiming seniority over certain respondents and the consequential reliefs including the quashing of circular Ex. 1-B dated October 12, 1978 issued by the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur laying down the eligibility criteria for promotion of Officers Grade-I to 'A' Grade.2. The petitioner is a direct recruit, who was appointed was Probationary Officer initially in Grade 'C later re-designated as Grade-I in the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur by order dated January 21, 1971. He joined the service on April 5, 1971 and was confirmed on April 5, 1973 as an Officer in Grade-I. Subsequent to the petitioner's appointment to a substantive post in Grade I, respondents Nos. 3 to 17 in the writ petition who were junior officers in the Bank were promoted as Officers Grade I on July 15, 1972 and they were also confirmed from the same dat...
Kedar Nath Sharma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN746
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. These are cross-appeals by the two sides against a judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No 137 of 1978, Kedar Nath Sharma v. Union of India and Ors.2. Petitioner Kedar Nath Sharma was offered appointment as Deputy Superintendent of Police (Company Commander Quarter Master) in the Border Security Force on a temporary basis by order Ex R/2 dated December 7, 1966 on the terms and conditions specified therein. The terms of appointment was mentioned specifically that his temporary appointment was governed by the CRP Force Act and Rules or such other Act and or Rules for the Border Security Force as may be prescribed by the Government and the Manual as amended from time to time. The petitioner was required to communicate acceptance of the offer on the specified terms and conditions within the prescribed period. The petitioner accepted this offer and joined duty on December 9, 1966. Thereafter appointments on temporary basis to the same post of ...
Jagmohan Alias Raj Mohan and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN784
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This appeal, by the accused, is directed against the judgment dated April 10, 1975 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganga Nagar, convicting and sentencing the appellants Raj Kumar and Jagmohan for the offence under Section 302 and 302/34 I.P.C. respectively and sentencing each of them to imprisonment for life.2. The case relates to the incident which took place at the house of Kashi Ram in village Malarampura, District Sri Ganganagar on the night of November 8, 1972, at about 9.00 p.m. in which Khetpal son of Kashi Ram was killed and Mohanlal, PW 2, was injured. The prosecution case, in brief, was that earlier on the day, the occurrence took place, the accused Rajkumar, accused Jagmohan, deceased Khetpal along with Budhram and Nathu Ram PW 4 had played the game of cards. During the play, a dispute arose, leading to exchange of words and also grappling between the accused Rajkumar and the deceased Khetpal. They exchanged slaps. The matter was, however, subside...
Ratna Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN756
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. By his judgment dated March 1, 1977, the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur convicted the appellant Ratna under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. By the same judgment, he further convicted the appellant under Section 387, I.P.C. and sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo six months' like imprisonment. The appellant has come-up in appeal and challenges his conviction.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased Smt. Leela was the wife of PW 2 Khema and was living with him in village Ieteli Khera P.S. Jhalara district Udaipur. On February 4, 1976, Khema went to his field and Smt. Leela went in the jungle to collect and bring firewood. When she left the house, she was wearing silver Karas (Article 1), Silver Hansli (Ar. 2) and clothes Blouse-Peticot and Odni (Articles 3 to 5). She was also wearing Boar (Head ornament) Article 6 and b...
Basant Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)59
M.B. Sharma, J.1. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. Gupta who is arguing the case for the informant. Out of the accused persons, three persons viz., Naval Kishore, Chandra Mohan and Mahesh also received injuries including the injuries by sharp weapon. The allegations against the petitioner in the FIR are that the petitioner caught hold of Babulal and the accused Mahesh inflicted a 'Gupti' blow in his abdomen. In the statement, no doubt, under Section 161 Cr.PC a further improvement has been made that subsequently petitioner had taken Gupti from co-accused Shiv Kumar and had inflicted two or three blows in the abdomen of deceased Babu Lal after he had fallen down. I would not like to enter into the evidence on record but taking into consideration injuries sustained by the accused petitioner, I am inclinded to grant the bail.2. Consequently, I allow this bail application and here by order that the accused-petitioner Basant Kumar shall b...
Gheesa Vs. Mangala and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-1987
Reported in: 1(1988)WLN(Rev)149
G.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a civil second appeal under Section 100 CPC, against the judgment and decree of Additional District Judge Alwar affirming the decree passed by the Munsif Thanagaji. The agricultural field as alleged by the defendant of Khasra No. 377 measuring 2 bighas and 7 biswas situated in village Narainpura, out of which 1 bigha 7 biswas was used for cremation ground by the villagers of the village and dhanis is subject matter of litigation. The plaintiff's case was that one bigha land banjar kadim and the other part of 2 bighas and 7 biswas is cremation ground. The sale was made by the biswedar Shetan Singh, Madan, Bane Singh, Ranjeet Singh resident of Kharkhadi Khurd to the appellant and the appellant wanted to cultivate it on 1971 which was objected by the village People. The suit was then brought in representative capacity.2. The defendant appellant contested the suit and pleaded that the claim of the respondent is absolutely false and the land in question has never be...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »