Rajasthan Court January 1991 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.
Nazir Vs. Manjura and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN194
B.R. Arora, J.1. This criminal revision petition is directed against the order dated June 6, 1990, passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sangariya, by which the learned Magistrate awarded maintenance to Mst. Manjura, Zulfkar and Jalkayja-Tak-Farun.2. Mst. Manjura filed an application Under Section 125 Cr. P.C. against Nazir for grant of maintenance for herself as well as for her son Zulfkar and daughter Jalkayja-Tak-Farun. The learned Magistrate by his order dated June 6, 1990, allowed the maintenance allowance to the wife Manjura from the date of application upto September 29, 1986, the date on which she was given divorce by the husband Nazir in the Court and also awarded maintenance to the son and daughter @ Rs. 200/-per month each. It is against his order that the present petition has been filed.3. It is cotended on behalf of the petitioner that he has given divorce to his wife Manjura and, therefore, he is not liable to pay maintenance to her. It is, also, cont...
iqbal Shah Vs. Mst. Bano
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN187
B.R. Arora, J.1. This petition Under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed against the order dated May 7, 1988, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh in Criminal Revision Petition No. 85 of 1985, and also the order dated July 16, 1988, passed by the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kapasan. Though a single petition is not maintainable against the two separate orders passed by the two separate Courts in two separate proceedings, but since the notice has been issued by the Court and the opposite party has put-in appearance, I, therefore, propose to decide the same rejecting the objection regarding the maintainability raised by the learned Counsel for the non-petitioner.2. Mst. Bano W/o Iqbalshah filed an application Under Section 125 Cr. P.C. for grant of maintenance for herself and for her three minor children in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Kapasan on November 2, 1985. It was mentioned in the application that she was married to Iqbalshah and...
Amritlal and anr. Vs. R.S.E.B. and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)WLN1
J.R. Chopra, J.1. These two writ petitions raise common questions of facts and law and, therefore, they were heard together and are being decided by a common order.2. The facts, necessary to be noticed for the disposal of these two writ petitions, briefly stated, are: that the respondent Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Jaipur (for short 'the Board') issued an advertisement for selection to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) in the year 1972, wherein the petitioner Amritlal Kaushik was selected. It further issued an advertisement for selection to the post of Overseer (Electrical) in the year 1976 and in that selection, petitioner Kurbansingh was selected as Overseer (Electrical).3. It was submitted that earlier in the Rajasthan State Electricity Board Service of Engineers (Recruitment, Promotion and Seniority etc.) Regulations, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations'), there was only the post of Junior Engineer but in the year 1973, the Regulations were amended vide ...
Director, Central State Farm and ors. Vs. Judge, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)WLC259; 1991(2)WLN158
J.R. Chopra, J 1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the Judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 20.10.1989 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected and the judgment rendered by the learned Judge, Labour Court Bikaner on 1.5.1989 has been upheld.2. The facts, necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal, briefly stated are: that respondent No. 2 Laxminarain, who was working in the Central State Farm, Suratgarh, which is a branch of the State Farm Corporation of India, as a Chowkidar in Block No. 1. It is alleged that on or about 24.1.1981, a report was received from the Security Supervisor that in the night intervening between 23rd and 24th January, 1981, the Police conducted a raid in the farm area of Suratgarh and seized a working still of raw liquor. As per the police version, two culprits of village Saramsar who were not employees of the Farm were caught but the respondent No....
Dr. Bhikam Chand Mehta Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)WLN292
Jasraj Chopra, J.1. The case of the petitioner is that he has done M.B.B.S. in the year 1976 and thereafter, he got the degree of D.M. (Neurology) from the Banglore University in the year 1982, which is a recognised degree by Medical Council of India. It is alleged that for post-graduation purposes, the petitioner studied at National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro-Sciences. He has submitted that for selection of Lecturers in Medical Colleges of Rajasthan, the Govt. of Rajasthan has framed the Rajasthan Medical Service (Collegiate Branch) Rules, 1962, which provides the detailed procedure for selection of lecturers in Medical Colleges by direct recruitment.2. It is alleged that the State Govt. decided to open some subjects in of certain specialities i.e. in Neurology, Nephrology, Cardiology and Nuclear Medicines and created certain posts. Pursuant to the creation of different specialities and to fill in the posts created, the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short the RPSC...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Bhanwar Kanwar (Smt.) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-15-1991
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ583Raj
ORDERMilap Chandra Jain, J. 1. This appeal was filed under Section 30, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 against the order of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Sri Ganganagar dated January 31, 1984 awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 19,200/- to the respondents on the death of her husband/their father, Gajanand. On August 25, 1987, the following order was passed : 'HON'BLE shri N.C. SHARMA, J. Mr. B.C. Bhansali for the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant wants time to file notices for Ghanshyam Singh and Sampat Singh, legal representatives of deceased respondent No. 1. He should do so within 5 days. In default whereof this miscellaneous appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court.' 2. On September 1, 1987, the office reported that process fee and notices have not been filed. Accordingly, the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) passed order on September 4, 1987 that the appeal stands dismissed. On May 2, 1989, an application under Order 41 Rule 19, C.P.C. f...
Gulab Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-15-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)WLC343; 1991(1)WLN193
B.R. Arora, J.1. These two revisions arise out of the judgment dated November 7, 1988, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer, in criminal Appeal No. 20 of 1988 (Mahesh Kumar v. Gulab Singh and Anr.) and I, therefore, propose to decide both these revision petitions by this common judgment.2. Shri Than Singh lodged a First Information Report on May 29, 1986, at Police Station Barmer that in the intervening night between May 28/29, 1986, a theft took-place, in his house. A case was registered and the police, during investigation, recovered the stolen articles. The Police, also, recovered golden ingot, weighing 159.500 grams from Mahesh Kumar. The accused pleaded guilty and they were convicted by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banner, by his judgment dated May 11, 1988. While convicting and sentencing the accused, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered that the golden ingot may be delivered to the complainant's brother Gulab Singh. Dissatisfied with this order, ord...
Gulab Singh and Mahesh Kumar Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-15-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)23
B.R. Arora, J.1. These two revisions arise out of the judgment dated November 7, 1988, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer, in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 1988 Mahesh Kumar v. Gulab Singh and Anr. and I, therefore, propose to decide both these revision petitions by this common judgment.2. Shri Than Singh lodged a First Information Report on May 29, 1986, at Police Station, Barmer that in the intervening night between May 28/29, 1986 a theft took-place in his house. A case was registered and the police, during investigation, recovered the stolen articles. The police, also, recovered golden ingot, weighing 159.500 grams from Mahesh Kumar. The accused pleaded quality and they were convicted by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer, by his judgment dated May 11, 1988. While convicting and sentencing the accused, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered that the golden ingot may be delivered to the complainant's brother Gulab Singh. Dissatisfied with this order, order...
Sumer Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN226
B.R. Arora, J.1. This revision-petition is directed against the order dated August 22, 1990, passed by the Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act cum Additional Sessions Judge, Jodhpur and the consequential order dated September 18, 1990, passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jodhpur.2. Kana Ram and others filed an application under Section 145, Cr. P.C. against Sumer Singh and others on August 4, 1980, praying therein that in village Dugar, KHASRA Nos. 363 and 414/9, measuring 276 Bighas and 9 Biswas are situated which are AAGORE land and the non-appellants Sumer Singh and party are forcibly trying to take possessions and cultivate that land. On July 31, 1980, they collected themselves and tried to cultivate the aforesaid land. When they were asked not to do so then they refused to acced to the request of the applicant/complainant-party. It was, therefore, prayed that there is apprehension of breach of peace with respect to the learned bearing Khasra Nos. 363 and 414/9 hence prop...
ishwar Lal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN229
B.R. Arora, J.1. This revision-petition is directed against the order dated August 17,1988, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sirohi, by which the learned Sessions Judge refused to frame charge Under Section 337, I.P.C. against the accused- respondents and sent the case back under Section 228 Cr. P.C. to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi.2. On November 15,1985, at about 7.00 p.m. a First Information Report was registered at the Police Station, Sirohi, on the statement of Ishwar Lal, recorded by Jogsingh, Assistant Sub- Inspector of Police, in the Government Hospital, Sirohi, wherein it was stated that on that very day, at about 7.00 p.m., when his brother Kailash was repairing the tube-light, at that lime Revad Ram S/o Shri Kishan came in front of their door and asked Kailash what was the matter and thereafter some altercation took-place and accused hurled abuses and went away. After sometime, he alongwith Kishan, Poonam, Om Prakash, Laxman, Magan S/o Revad, Smt. Guggi W/o Reva...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »