Rajasthan Court July 1994 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.
Smt. Dropadi and ors. Vs. Mahagraha Bhagwat Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Raj138
ORDERMilap Chandra, J. 1. This revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Addl. District Judge, Udaipur dated August 29, 1981 by which he has rejected the defendant-petitioners' application moved under Section 65, Evidence Act for the production of secondary evidence in respect of certaindocuments. By this order, the learned Addl. District Judge, Udaipur also dismissed the defendant-petitioners' application moved under Order 13, Rule 10. C.P.C.2. Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioners contends that the learned trial Court has acted with material irregularity and illegality in the exercise of its jurisdiction in rejecting the application seeking permission for producing secondary evidence.3. Learned counsel for the non-petitioners duly supports the order under challenge.4. Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioners was repeatedly requested to either show the application moved under Section 65, Evidence Act or to point out either in the revision petition ...
Ganpat Singh and ors. Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ616; 1995(2)WLC515; 1994(2)WLN540; 1994(2)WLN545
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This petition under Section 482 Cr PC has been preferred against the order D/- 15-4-93 passed by Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, No. 2, Jodhpur, whereby he dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioners and affirmed the order D/- 23-10-92 passed by the Learned Addl. District Magistrate, City Jodhpur under Section 146 Cr. PC attaching the subject matter of dispute namely agricultural land bearing Khasra No. 35 comprising 3 Bigha 14 biswas situated in village Poonjla Teh. Jodhpur Distt. Jodhpur.3. I have heard Shri M.L. Chaudary learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned public prosecutor Shri Thakur and Shri Bhatt learned Counsel for non-petitioner No. 2 and carefully perused the relevant record. The main contention of Shri Chaudary is that the disputed land is in the continuous cultivation possession of the petitioners, that the same is part of Khasra No. 35, total area 9 Bigha 14 Biswas, that the dispute...
Kashmirilal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)WLC495; 1994(2)WLN83
P.K. Palli, J.1. The petitioners-Firm at the relevant time was engaged in the business to purchase raw cotton from the market and then to process it in their Chachan Cotton and Ginning factory. Under the provisions of Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961 the State framed Rules in the year 1963 wherein the provision for levy of market fee on agricultural produce bought and sold in the market was levied. A licence for sale and purchase of the produce is required under the Rules and the firm was further required to pay such market fee as specified in the schedule. In item no. 1 of the said schedule fiber contains 'cotton' (ginned and unginned) and in oil seed it also contains cotton seed. An amendment was made in the schedule on 23rd April, 1977 and therein only raw cotton (un-ginned) was kept in the schedule and ginned cotton as well as cotton seed was taken out from its purview. Both these items existed in the schedule before the amendment. The case of the petitioner is that ...
Gulab Chand Vs. L.R.S. of Ganpat Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)WLC258; 1994(2)WLN543
Gokal Chand Mital, C.J.1. Rama Kishan was admittedly owner of the shop in dispute. After his death, dispute about the shop arose between his two sons-Ganpat Lal on one side and Gulab Chand on the other. Gulab Chand filed a suit for partition of the shop and separate possession of his share as Gulab Chand was in possession of the entire shop and was not prepared to amicably settle the dispute out of court. The defendant contested the suit and claimed to the exclusive owner of the shop. The trial court decreed the suit and the defendant's appeal remained unsuccessful before the learned Single Judge.2. This is special appeal by the defendant.3. Hardly any argument has been raised before us worth noticing. Before the learned Single Judge, on behalf of the appellant, reliance was placed on document marked Ex. A-2, a will executed by the father in favour of the appellant and on this basis he claimed the entire shop. The learned Single Judge noted that no pleadings were made in this behalf in...
Kushal Singh Vs. Gram Panchayat Choutan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-19-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)WLC331; 1994(2)WLN542
Gokal Chand Mital, C.J.1. The Gram Panchayat put the land to auction on 2nd & 3rd March, 1981 and the petitioner was the highest bidder for Rs. 9995/-. According to Rule 263 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti (General) Rules, 1961, 10% of the amount has to be deposited by the highest bidder immediately on the spot and the balance within two months from the date of auction. As against 10% the petitioner deposited 20% on the spot but the balance of 80% was deposited by him on 23rd September, 1982 that is one and half year after the auction and 16 months after the last date of deposits. The Revenue Appellate Authority set aside the auction sale on the ground that since deposit was not made within two months, the auction was void. It relied on Manilal Mohanlal Shah v. Sardar Sayed Ahmed Syed Mahmed : [1955]1SCR108 Wherein under an identical position Under Order 21 Rule 84 read with Rule 85 of the Code of Civil Procedure it was held that if the balance 75% is not deposited within fortnight, ...
Kammo @ KamaruddIn Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-1994
Reported in: 1994(3)WLC25; 1994(2)WLN404
Yad Ram Meena, J.1. The petitioner has moved this petition for his pre-mature release under the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentence) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). He has undergone actual imprisonment for more than 14 years. His case is that he has not been considered by the Advisory Board for pre-mature release. However, the learned Dy. Govt. Advocate has pointed out that the Advisory Board has considered the case of the petitioner for pre-mature released on 26th August, 1993 and on the basis of the reports made by the District Collector and Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, did not recommend his case for pre-mature release.2. No reply has been filed by that State but we have seen the reports of the Collector and the Superintendent of Police and the recommendations of the Advisory Board in the file which was shown to us by the learned Dy. G.A. First of all it may be said that the reports which have been made basis for arriving at a decision by t...
Vinod Palawat and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)WLC294; 1994(2)WLN405
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. Heard & perused the case diary and other relevant record.2. Succinctly stated the allegations against the petitioners' Company, which is being run under the name and style of M/s Accurate Pipes and Plastic Private. Ltd., is that the said Co. was availing various credit facilities from State Bank of India, Udaipur Branch and Agricultural Development Branch, Badgaon, Udaipur & that the basic raw material, which is being used by the Company for their production activity, is PVC resin, which is procured through imports. The stock of PVC resin so imported was being stored in the various custom bounded Warehouses and one of those being Pothampura, Indore. The stocks were under the State Bank of India's specific lien and it was so noted with the Warehouses Authorities. The stock of PVC resin was to be released only against specific authorisation in writing from the S.B.I. It is alleged that on 8th March, 1991, the said Company through its Directors in conspiracy with ban...
Bashir Khan Vs. Ranger, Social Vaniki and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-1994
Reported in: 1996ACJ115; [1995(70)FLR800]; (1995)ILLJ845Raj; 1994(2)WLC573; 1994(2)WLN164
Verma, J.1. This reference to a larger Bench by a learned Single Judge of this Court arises in the following way. Petitioner Bashir Khan was employed under respondents No. 1 & 2 as a workman at the relevant period on daily wage basis. While he was discharging his duties as a workman under the respondents a water tank at Forest Nursery, Gudhachandraji, belonging to the State got burst and the debris fell over his legs resulting in fractures of both the legs. Petitioner Bashir Khan submitted a claim petition before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Sawai Madhopur and claimed a compensation to the tune of Rs. 24,000/-. Notices of this claim petition were sent to respondents No. 1 and 2 but they did not care to put in appearance with the result that ex parte proceedings were taken and the evidence of the petitioner was recorded and by order dated September 28, 1987 the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner awarded asum of Rs. 66081. 60p. against the aforesaid respondents. A penalty in...
Tarun Vyas Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-1994
Reported in: 1994(2)WLN401
P.K. Palli, J.1. It is agreed that this petition be finally disposed of at this stage.2. The petitioner joined the Dagistan Medical Institute, Russia and passed the first Professional Examination, including Anatomy, Physiology and Biochemistry which is equivalent to First Year M.B.B.S. Course of India. This admission was given under a Scheme known as Indo Soviet Cultural & Educational Foundation. It was after due selection under the Scheme, the petitioner joined the Course in Russia. The First Professional Examination was passed by him in July, 1993. Due to political changes in that country, the agreement between Indo Soviet Cultural and Educational Foundation and the Government of India stood terminated and the petitioner had no option but to seek admission in India and for the purpose he applied for being admitted by way of transfer in S.P. Medical College, Bikaner for II Year M.B.B.S. Professional Course. It is not disputed that the College situated in U.S.S.R. now Russia and traini...
Poonma Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-14-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ359
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26-8-93, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellants for the offences under Sections 147 and 304 Part II, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo two months' simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 147 I.P.C. and seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default of payment of fine further to undergo three months' simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 304 Part II, I.P.C. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The appellants were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer, for the offences under Sections 147, 302 and 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. The case of the prosecution, in nut shell, is that on 15-5-92, at about 5.00 p.m., Paru Ram and h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »