Rajasthan Court April 1992 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. Munga Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-03-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN598
Rajesh Balia, J.1. This is an appeal by the State against the judgment of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Churu dated 20th December, 1975 in Sessions Case No. 20 of 1975 whereby the acused respondents Munga Ram alias Adram, Dalvir Singh, Ranvir Singh, Dhoop Singh, Mst. Chandrawati and Mst. Shanti were acquitted of the offences under Sections 148, 447, 302/149, 307/149 and 324 I.P.C. with which they were charged-with.2. The prosecution case is that disputed field Khasra No. 127 measuring 17 bighas and 4 biswas is situated in Piru Ki Dhani of village Lutana Sadasukh Tehsil Rajgrah Distt. Churu. According to prosecution, the disputed field belongs to complainant party Kishan Gopal, deceased, and his sons Amilal, Banwari & Shivdan and his other brothers. Accused Dhoop Singh, Ranvir Singh and Dalvir Singh are three real brothers and cousins of the complainant party. Accused Mst. Chandrawati is the wife of accused Ranvir Singh and Mst Shanti is the wife of accused Dhoop Singh and accused Munga...
Shambhu Lal Sharma Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLN451
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dt. 12.2.92 passed by the learned Addl. Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, No. 2, Jaipur City, Jaipur in suit No. 1755/88, whereby the learned trial Court has rejected the application filed on behalf of the plaintiff-petitioner under Order 11 Rule 12 C.P.C.2. A suit has been filed by the plaintiff-petitioner on 7.12.88 claiming a declaration that the order of termination of his service dated, 6.8.86 is illegal. The petitioner has stated that the order of termination of his service passed on 6.8.88 is unlawful, because, this order has been made in total disregard of the principles of natural justice. He has not been given opportunity of hearing and he has been condemned unheard.3. On 20.9.91, the plaintiff petitioner filed an application under Order 11 Rule 12 C.P.C. with the prayer that the order of termination of his service and the remarks made in the way-bill, which are in possession of the defendant- nonpetitione...
Soni Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1992
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ417Raj
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. Though the facts are quite different, but a simple common question of law arises for determination in these two writ petitions, and therefore, notwithstanding that facts are different, I am deciding both these writ petitions by a common order.2. The order Annexure-2, dated February 3, 1983 in Writ Petition No. 1533/83 and the order (Ex.8) dated March 1, 1985 in Writ Petition No. 1112/85 have been passed by the Government in Labour Department in exercise of its powers ; under Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act of 1947).3. In both these cases, the petitioners were employees of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation. Both were charge-sheeted. Domestic enquiries were held and, on the basis of the evaluation of evidence made by the employer, namely, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, orders were passed for their removal from service. In both the cases, workmen challenged the action of the management of the Corporation in...
Smt. Ganga and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ216; 1992(3)WLC16; 1992(1)WLN555
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. This revision petition filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been directed against the judgment dated 16-9-89 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, whereby he ordered for the abatement of the appeal filed by Champa Lal due to his death; directed that the fine imposed on Champa Lal by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jodhpur be recovered from the properties left by him and confirmed the order of the learned trial Magistrate passed under Section 456 Cr.P.C. for the restoration of possession of the disputed premises.2. Succinctly stated the martix of the case leading to this revision petition is that in execution of an ex parte decree dated 5-10-74 for ejectment passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Judhpur against tenants Ram Pratap and Kashi Ram, landlord non-petitioner No. 2, Rajendra Kumar, was given the physical possession of the rooms and a stair case on 14-1-1975 by the Sales amin. Rajendra Kumar put bags of 'GUR'...
Anil Kumar and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1992
Reported in: 1992CriLJ3637
Rajendra Saxena, J. 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 374, Cr. P.C. against the judgment dated 31-3-1980 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotara, whereby he convicted the appellants for offence under Section 306, IPC and sentenced each of them to three years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to further undergo six months' R.I.2. Briefly, the relevant facts are that on 1-7-1979, on the written report of Chananamal (P.W. 15) alleging the death of his daughter-in-law, Smt. Maya, due to drowning in the water tank Vkadk an enquiry under Section 174, Cr. P.C. was initiated by the SHO, Barmer. It may be mentioned here that the said report of Chananamal was not filed in the Court along with the challan and it was reported that the same was missing. On 1-7-1979, Rewamal (P.W. 2), the father of the deceased, also submitted a written report to the Collector, Barmer alleging therein that he had married his daughter Maya to appellant Anil Kumar about 1 1/2 months ago and ...
Sikander Beg Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1992
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1114
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. Petition No. 201/90 has been filed against the order dated 26-4-1990 passed by learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Merta in F.I.R.. Case No.217/89, Police Station, Merta City, while petition No. 215/ 90 has been directed against the order dated 19-5-1990 passed by learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Jaitaran in F.I.R. Case No. 53/90, Police Station, Jaitaran in respect of the release of Truck No. RSN 1479. 2. Since the facts of these petitions are inter-related, those are being disposed off by a common order.3. It appears that on the report of one Sarvan, Crime No. 217/89 was registered on 26-12-1989 at Police Station, Merta City under Sections 147, 382, I.P.C. and Truck No. RSN 1479 was seized. On 28-12-1989, Sikander Beg and Rashid Khan filed separate applications under Section 451, Cr. P.C. For the custody of the said truck, but the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Merta by his order dated 4th January, 1990 did not consider it proper to pass...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pushpa Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1992
Reported in: 1992ACJ1145
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. These two appeals arise from an award dated 15.4.1986 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bharatpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in MACT case No. 39 of 1982. A sum of Rs. 78,000/- was awarded in favour of Pushpa Devi, Krishna Kumar, Mahendra Kumar, Pradeep Kumar, Munna and Laxmi Devi, the claimants, with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum.2. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. filed an appeal (No. 186 of 1986) and cross-objection (Appeal No. 206 of 1986) has been filed by the claimants. As common questions of facts and law are involved in both these appeals, they are being decided by this common judgment.3. Jagdish Prasad, husband of Pushpa Devi, boarded bus No. RSD 2551 on 27.1.1982 while he was going from Jaipur to Bharatpur. The bus overturned at village Hantara. The claimants alleged that the bus collided with a culvert resulting in the death of Jagdish Prasad.4. The age of the deceased was 32 years and his earning at the time of...
Dharmendra Acharya Vs. the State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-01-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLN64
J.R. Chopra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 14.2.1992 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant has been dismissed.2. The case of the petitioner-appellant is that he passed the Secondary Education Examination in the year 1990 from the Board of Secondary Education, Assam and thereafter, his father migrated to Rajasthan and so, he obtained his School Leaving Certificate and sought his admission in Rajasthan Bal Mandir, Senior Higher Secondary School, Bikener in the 10 + 2 scheme in the session 1990-91. He passed XI Class and secured 59% marks. Thereafter, his form was sent for the Senior High Secondary Examination to the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer but his form has been rejected on the ground that while passing secondary school examination from the Board of Secondary Education, Assam, he has only obtained 30% marks in two subjects whereas the Regulations of the Board of Secondary Education, Rajastha...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›