Rajasthan Court December 1996 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.
Dharam Chand Vs. Board of Revenue
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-03-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)WLN689
B.J. Shethana, J.1. The petitioner who claims to be Harijan has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order passed by the Revenue Court i.e. S.D.O., Hanumangarh on 18.6.82 (Annex. 2) by which the suit filed by the present respondents No. 4 to 8 for eviction under Section 183 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (for short the Act) came to be decreed against the petitioner and Shri Milkhi Ram, respondent No. 9 against which an appeal was preferred before the Revenue appellate authority, Bikaner which came to be dismissed on 27.1.1983 (Annex. 3). Second appeal preferred before the Board of Revenue also came to be dismissed on 5.10.88 (Annex. 4). These orders have been challenged by the petitioner in this petition before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Strictly speaking this is not a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution but this is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. Learned Counsel Shri Sharma for the ...
Sanjay Kumar Rawal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-02-1996
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ149Raj; 1997WLC(Raj)UC48
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The petitioner who is grandson of late Shri Sadhu Ram is seeking mandamus and direction to the respondents for providing him employment/ appointment on compassionate ground under the Rajasthan Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying while in service Rules, 1975 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Rules). It is stated that late Shri Sadhu Ram was employed in Education Department as Teacher Gr. III and while he was in service, he died on December 30, 1984. It appears that he left Shri Bhagwan Sahai (son) and his wife Smt. Hazari Devi behind him. According to the petitioner, he moved an application on March 16, 1994 for getting appointment under the Rules of 1975. His claim was rejected on the ground that he was not entitled to get appointment under the Rules.2. It is contended by the learned counsel that the claim of the petitioner has been wrongly denied as the benefit under the Rules could be extended to any other close relative of the deceased to b...
Kehar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-02-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1753
P.P. Naolekar, J.1. This is an appeal against the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 302, IPC and the consequent sentence of life-imprisonment. According to the prosecution, complainant Veer Singh lodged oral report on 21 -5-82 at 9.30 a.m. stating that, yesterday he irrigated his field after the turn of Kehar Singh and, there being no further fields of other persons to be irrigated through that water-channel, water continued to flow into their field. Today, he along with his brother Atma Singh came to their field to carry away fodder. They found that Kehar Singh (accused-appellant) with his elder brother Gurmail Singh and brother-in-law Bunta Singh was standing at the naka (inlet) and had diverted the water of their share to their (Kehar Singh and Gurmail Singh's) field. They (Veer Singh and Atma Singh) stopped the cart at the naka. Veer Singh was armed with a kasi and Tangali. Atma Singh was carrying a Tangali with him. They asked Gurmail Singh why they (Gurmail Singh ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›