Rajasthan Court May 1989 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.
Kishan Lal Vs. Shyam Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-02-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Raj114; 1990(1)WLN548
Israni, J. 1. This revision petition has been referred by learned single Judge for decision to larger Bench and formulated following two questions:1. Whether a decree for eviction passed prior to the applicability of the provisions of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for a particular area can be executed by the Executing Court and if so in what circumstances?2. In case it is found that it is permissible for the Executing Court to proceed with the execution of such a decree and to hold an inquiry about the satisfaction of the grounds contained in Section 13 of the Act, what is scope of such an inquiry?2. The brief facts out of which the present revision petition has arisen are that Shyam Lal owner of a shop situated in village Chhipa-Badod let out his shop on rent to the petitioner Kishan Lal. Shyam Lal filed a suit for eviction of the petitioner on January 4, 1972 under the provisions of the Act were not applicable t...
Lohdya Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-02-1989
Reported in: 1989WLN(UC)99
V.S. Dave, J.1. This is a revision petition directed against the judgment of the Addl. Sessions Judge Dausa camp; Bandikui, dt. 14-12-1988 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the trail court i.e, the Judicial Magistrate, Bandikui who convicted the petitioner for offence Under Section 304A, IPC and sentenced to four month's rigorous imprisonment.when this revision petition came up for hearing on 8-3-1989 it was found that the petition could be disposed of finally at this stage only as a short point was involved but on that day hearing was deferred for want of record. The case has been listed for hearing after the record has been received.2.Briefiy stating the facts of this case are that one lalluram, Pw 1, gave a written report to the A.S.I. police station, Bandikui who arrived on the spot of accident on 5-6-80 at 1.30 a m He in turn sent it to the station house Officer, police station, Bandikui for registration of the case under Section 304A IPC According to this report on...
Prabhu Dayal Jat Vs. Alwar Sahakari Bhumi Vikas Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-01-1989
Reported in: [1990(60)FLR9]; (1991)IILLJ130Raj; 1989(2)WLN280
Byas, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order dated October 12, 1987 (Annexure-6) by which his services were terminated. The petition was originally filed against the respondent Bank and its Secretary. Subsequently, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur was impleaded as party.2. Briefly recalled, the relevant facts are that the petitioner was initially appointed as L.D.C. in the respondent Bank on 24th January, 1987 on daily wages. While he was so working on the post of L.D.C., he was appointed as Class IV employee in the regular pay scale on 15th May, 1987 by order Annexure-5. By the impugned order, Annexure-6 dated 12th October, 1987 his services were terminated. It appears from Annexure-6 that the petitioner's appointment was found irregular and as such the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Government of Rajasthan (respondent No. 3) issued directions to terminate his services. In compliance of those directions, the Administrator of the Bank issued t...
Hardeo Lal Jat Vs. Alwar Sahkari Bhumi Vikas Bank Ltd Alwar and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-01-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN561
S.S. Byas, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 12-10-1987 (Annexure-5), by which his services were terminated. The petition was originally filed against the respondent-Bank and its Secretary; Subsequently, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur was impleaded as party.2. Briefly recalled the relevant facts are that the petitioner & initially appointed as LDC in the respondent-Bank on 13-2-1987 on daily wages by order, Annexure-1. While he was no working on the post of LDC, he was appointed a Class IV employee in the regular pay scale on 27-4-1987 by order, Annx 4. By the impugned order Annexure-5 dated 12-101987 his services were terminated. It appears from Annexure-5 that the petitioner's appointment was found irregular and as such the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Government of Rajasthan (respondent No. 3) issued directions to terminate his services, In compliance of these directions, the Administrator of the Bank issued the impugned ord...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›