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.
State of Rajasthan Vs. Bhera Ram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)465
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This is a State appeal against the acquittal of the accused persons under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. 1954 (here in after referred to as 'the Act').2. The brief facts giving rise to this case are that Ratan Singh, Food Inspector inspected the shop of M/s Mahavir Store located at Rui Katla, Pali on 26-4-1974. He took the sample of chilli powder and sent that to the Public Analyst for examination. The Public Analyst found the chilli powder adulterated. He sought the consent of the local authority and launched the prosecution against the accused persons. Learned Munsif Magistrate, Pali by his judgment dated 25-2-1978 held that the prosecution has not been able to establish that Sumer Raj is the owner of the shop, he further found that Rule 22 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (here in after referred to as 'the Rules of 1955') was not complied with. It was observed by the learned Magistrate that since ...
Madanlal Vs. Khushi Ram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj190; 1988WLN(UC)193
ORDERI.S. Israni, J.1. This is a civil revision petition against the order of learned Civil Judge, Alwar dated 3-5-1982, by which the application of the petitioner under Order 47 and Section 151, C.P.C. was dismissed (Civil Misc. Application No. 79/80).2. A suit for pre-emption was instituted in the trial Court, which was partially decreed. The suit was decreed in respect of the portion which was valued by the trial Court at Rs. 4000/- and the claim of the petitioner regarding the portion valued at Rs. 1800/-was rejected However, the learned Civil Judge omitted to mention the date up to which the aforesaid amount as per the provisions of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act, 1966'! and Order 20 Rule 14, C.P.C. was to be deposited. Therefore, an application for rectification in the decree was moved on 20-2-80. This application of the petitioner was rejected the trial Court on the ground that since appeal has been filed, therefore, the application could not be entertained.3. Shri ...
Fauja Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN704
K.S. Lodha, J.1. This revision has been filed by three accused persons against the order dated December 18, 1986 of the learned Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar for quashing the proceedings and setting aside the order framing the charges against them.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.3. The order has been challenged before me by the learned Counsel on two counts: (1) so far as the accused Bachan Singh is concerned. It has been argued that the learned Magistrate, who committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge, could not have proceeded against this accused, as, admittedly, he was a military employee and could not be proceeded against without complying with rules 3 and 4 of the Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Juristiction) Rules, 1978 (here in after referred to as, 'the Rules') framed under Section 475, Cr. PC and as a matter of fact in this case proper compliance with these Rules has not been made. Reliance in suppor...
Raju Alias Raj Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)630
Vinod Shankar Dave, J.2. This bail application is pending since 18-8-1987 and court wanted to know the antecedents of accused-petitioner Raju alias Raj Kumar, against whom the learned Sessions had mentioned that several cases are pending. The jail authorities were asked to produce the record of the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor had also been directed to keep the diary ready, as to in how many police stations the cases are pending against the petitioner and of what nature. Since the information could not be received on the earlier dates then two days' future timely granted However, it was mentioned that no further time shall be granted. When the case was called up today, neither the diary was produced nor an information about the antecedents of the case of the accused petitioner was furnished. It is disgusting to note that even in the matter of the accused against whom multiple cases are pending the police authorities are not vigilant and do not intend to assist the court...
Hari NaraIn Tiwari Vs. Damodar Busar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)631
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This revision petition has been filed againt the order dated 23-11-1982 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Jaipur Distt, Jaipur in civil suit No. 43/77, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 14, Rule 5 CPC was dismissed.2. The plaintiff non-petitioner, filed a money suit for recovery of Rs. 800/- alongwith interest. The defendant-petitioner, inter alia raised a preliminary objection that the plaintiff petitioner is doing business of money lending and is a money lender within meaning of the Money Lenders Act. It is further objected that since the plaintiff does not possess any valid licence at the time of alleged transaction as such the plaintiff was not entitled to file the suit. Issue No. 6 was framed; which reads as under:Whether the plaintiff is a money lender and does business of money lending3. The burden of this issue was cast on the defendant. The petitioner defendant filed an application praying that the onus of the above ...
Kali Alias Kala Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)505
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal against the conviction and sentence of the accused appellant Kali alias Kala Singh under Section 302 and 449 IPC passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh by his judgment dated 15-5-1982 whereby accused Kali alias Kala Singh has been convicted under Sections 302 and 449 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment on the first count and 7 years rigorous imprisonment and a line of Rs. 50/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 15 days rigorous imprisonment under the second count. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that the accused Kali alias Kalasingh and Resham Singh were charged under Section 302 and 449 read with Section 34 IPC. A First Information Report Ex.P 3 was lodged by PW 4 Rangasingh at police station Tibi on 7-7-1981 at 9 a.m. It was stated there in that Mst. Ako Bai PW 5 daughter of deceased Shankar Singh resident of Surewala came to him i...
Nen Mal and Etc. Etc. Vs. Kan Mal and Etc.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj33; 1987(2)WLN805
I.S. Verma, C.J.1. This judgment shall also dispose of Special Appeal No. 76 of 1981 and Special Appeal No. 77 of 1981. The common question involved for decision in all these three matters relates to the constitutional validity of Clause (iii) of Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act, 1966.2. Plaintiff Kanmal filed Civil Suit No. 10 of 1974 in the Court of District Judge, Jodhpur, claiming a decree for pre-emption on the basis of his right of pre-emption contained in Section 6( l)(iii) of the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act, 1966 on the ground of easement of light and air. This suit has been decreed on Oct. 13, 1976 by the Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, granting a decree for pre-emption to the plaintiff on payment of the sale price of Rs. 13,000/- together with Rs. 9,285/- as cost of improvement of the property incurred by the defendant. Defendant Nen Mal has filed this appeal (First Appeal No. 7 of 1977) against the decree for pre-emption granted in plaint...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Motilal Ramjiwan and Company
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-1987
Reported in: (1987)66CTR(Raj)23; [1988]171ITR294(Raj)
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, is to answer the following question of law, namely :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a correct interpretation of the provisions of Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, only the net and not the gross amount of interest paid to each of the partners in the instant case shall be deducted in computing the assessee-firm's income chargeable under the head 'Profits and gains of business' for the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1978-79 ?'2. The relevant assessment year is 1978-79 for which the accounting period ended on November 11, 1977. The assessee is a partnership firm comprising of six partners. The books of the assessee contained the capital account of each of the partners as well as the account showing withdrawals made by the parties. In respect of the credit entries in favour of each partner, the assessee-firm paid...
Vidhya Bhawan Society and anr. Vs. Smt. Vishwa Vijay Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN600
J.R. Chopra, J.1. This revision is directed against the appellate order of the learned Additional District Judge No 1, Udaipur dated 16-12-1986 whereby the learned lower court has accepted the appeal against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur City (North), Udaipur dated 28-10 1986 by which the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application of the plaintiff for grant of temporary injunction.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this revision petition briefly stated are: that the plaintiff-non petitioner Smt. Vishwa Vijay Singh was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the year 1970 by defendant petitioner No. 1 Vidhya Bhawan Society, Fatehpura, Udaipur. She was confirmed as Assistant Teacher on 10-8-1973. However, in pursuance of the resolution on the recommendation of the Staff Selection Committee at its meeting held on 11-9-1984, she was appointed as Head Mistress of the Nursery School by the Administrator of the Vidhya Bh...
Hasti Mal Vs. Bhoja and State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)493
Vinod Shankar Dave, J.1. This revision petition has been directed against the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beawar dated 3rd July, 1987 reversing the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Beawar dated 5th November, 1986 in an application for interim custody of the tractor bearing registration No. RSZ 2437.2. Brief facts leading to this petition are that the petitioner Hastimal's driver Durga Singh lodged a report at Beawar City Police Station on 11th September, 1986 alleging that he is working as driver with petitioner Hastimal who had given in his charge one tractor mark 'Ford' bearing registration No. RSZ 2437 along with a compressor drilling machine and few more accessories. On 5th September, 1986 one man whose name was Bhoja and who is known to him approached him and accompanied him to a place known as Chang Gate. He (Durga Singh) got down for taking soms goods. By that time, this man (Bhoja) escaped with the tractor and its accessories. He info...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »