Rajasthan Court January 1997 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.
Rajasthan Financial Corporation Vs. Banwari Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Raj273; 1997(2)WLC199
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. The crucial legal questions which arise for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the application filed under Section 31(1) of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (for short the Act) is a plaint and whether the provisions of Limitation Act are applicable to it? 2. This question has emerged in the following circumstances - (i) Respondent No. 1 after availing loan facility from the appellant (for short RFC) purchased a jeep. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 executed a deed of guarantee and had mortgaged their houses. The liability of the guarantors is co-extensive with the principal debtor. (ii) Loan amounting to Rs. 91,000/- was to be repaid in 58 monthly instalments of Rs. 2200/-each. When the principal debtor did not make the payment the RFC took the vehicle into possession after serving notice under Section 29 of the Act and realised Rs. 47.100 from the auction of the said vehicle. For enforcing the liability of the sureties an application under Sectio...
Ashwini Kumar Bhardwaj Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2150; 1997(1)WLC673; 1997(1)WLN143
ORDERS.C. Mital, J.1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash FIR No. 471/96 Police Station, Kotwali, Chittorgarh under Sections 3, 7 r/w 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.2. The brief facts are that A.S.I. Ram Singh conducted search of the cars Tata Siyara of the petitioner and recovered illegal ammunition on 7-6-96. he lodged first information report and a case was registered against the petitioner FIR No. 411/ 96 under Section 3 r/w 25 of the Arms Act. During investigation the petitioner furnished an information under Section 27 Evidence Act for the recovery U.S. Carbine cal 30 M.I. from the house of Mohan Mistri and in pursuance of this information the above illegal arm was recovered in a bag from the house of Mohan Mistri at the instance of the petitioners. The bag was locked and the petitioner stated this to be his lock which was broken in the absence of the key by the petitioner. On the basis of this information and recovery of U.S. Carbine of which t...
Rameshwar Vs. State of Raj. Through Municipal Council
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2064; 1997(1)WLN250
ORDERM.A.A. Khan, J.1. In this case petitioner was alleged to have sold 1500 gms. 'Jalebi' to P.W. 1, Sushil Kumar. Food Inspector, on 14-10-1983 at his shop as village Seemalya. Distt. Kota. The 'Jalebis' were represented to have been prepared in 'vanaspati'. On the analysis of one of the three parts of the sample Jalebi, the Public Analyst reported the same to be adulterated under Section 2(i-a) (j) and misbranded under Section 2(ix) (c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (the Act). On a complaint having been filed by the Food Inspector before him the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, No. 2 Kota found the petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 7/16 of the Act convicted him as such and sentenced him to six months R.I. and Rs. 1,000/- as fine. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner. Hence this petition under Section 397, Cr.P.C.2. Mr. Sunil Tyagi, the learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the del...
Dilip Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2461; 1997(2)WLC349
ORDERM.A.A. Khan, J.1. On Nov. 22, 1980 at Pushkar, Distt. Ajmer, PW 2 Gauri Shankar. Food Inspector had purchased 660 ml. of milk from the petitioner Dalip Singh. On chemical examination the sample milk was found adulterated due to its non-conforming with the prescribed standard, presence of 20% of added water and extraction of about 20% of fat therefrom. On trial, the trial Magistrate found the petitioner guilty of the offence Under Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954(the Act), convicted him as such and sentenced him Under Section 16(1) of the Act for six months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, His appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer having failed, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this application Under Section 397, Cr.P.C.2. In exercise of its revisory jurisdiction this Court does not interfere with the concurrent findings of the inferior Court unless such findings are perverse and found recorded in total disregar...
Lal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)WLN248
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. In this case Lalchand Petitioner sold on 20.1.1982 mixed milk to Qutbuddin, Food Inspector (PW.l) near. Jhal Ka Kunwan at Tonk. On analysis the Public Analyst found the sample milk adulterated for its not conforming to the prescribed standard of milk fat content at 4.5% and solid non-fat contents at 8.5%. The sample milk had fat content at 5.2% and solids non-fat at 6.10%. On trial the learned C.J.M. Tonk found the petitioner guilty of offence Under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration At, 1954 (the Act), convicted him as such and sentenced to 1 year Rigorous Imprisonment and Rs. 1,000/-fine. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk, confirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner. Hence, this revision petition Under Section 397 Cr. P.C.2. Mr. Narendra Jain, the learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that since the case against the petitioner was not tried as a summary trial case, as required by Section 16A of the Act and was tried as a warr...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Roop Narayan and 19 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC455; 1997(1)WLN339
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The core question which arise for consideration in all these 19 deceaseds to whether consignment booked under a 'suit to contain' railway receipt, amounts to admission on the part of the railway administration, that the said number of articles had in fact were loaded?2. This question has emerged in the following circumstances:(1) The claimants respondents (for sanrt, the claimants) had filed claim application before Railway Claims Tribunal Jaipur Bench (for short the Tribunal) for short delivery of the number of bags of cotton seeds Husk mentioned in each application. On account of the negligence of the Railway. The Railway administration admitted booking particulars and issuance of short certificates but pleaded that the short certificates were issued without prejudice and the Railway Receipts bear the remark 'said to contain' and whatever loaded was delivered to the claimants at the destination.(ii) There was a difference of opinion between the two member of t...
Chhelaram Vs. Manak
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Raj284; 1997(2)WLC85; 1997(1)WLN138
Gopal Lal Gupta, J.1. This second appeal has been directed against the decree/order/judgment dated 10-10-1995 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sojat dismissing the appellant's first appeal on the ground that it was barred by time.2. Respondent Manak had filed a suit for permanent injunction in respect of plot of land situate in village Giri. Defendant-appellant in his reply claimed that the suit land was in his possession. The trial Court framed three issues. After recording evidence and hearing the parties the trial Court decreed the suit on 26-8-1994 holding that the suit land belonged to the plaintiff and it was in his possession. The defendant preferred appeal before Additional District Judge on 19-10-1994. The office reported that the appeal was time-barred. The appeal was, however, admitted subject to objection of limitation. Thereafter, vide impugned order the learned Additional Dist. Judge held that the appeal was time-barred. He, therefore, dismissed the applic...
Pala Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2797
Mohd. Yamin, J.1. Appellant Pala Singh was tried for offences under Sections 449 and 302 of I.P.C. along with Kala Singh and Mst. Bobo by Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Sriganaganagar. Vide the judgment dated 11 -5-92. Mst. Bibo was acquitted while Kala Singh was convicted for offence under Section 323 I.P.C. and sentenced to the period already undergone. But Pala Singh was convicted Under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to further undergo four months S.I. It is against this conviction and sentence that Pala Singh preferred this appeal.2. The case of the prosecution, in nut shell, is that on 10-7-9) Smt. Channo Devi wife of Bhika Ram who was admitted in Government Hospital, Sriganganager, gave a statement to a police officer alleging that Pala Singh was her neighbour. Smt. Bibo wife of Pala Singh used to abuse her. On 10-7-91 Smt. Bibo had a quarrel with Channo Devi, therefore, the terms were inimical. Bhikaram, the husband...
Abhijeet Singh @ Gouri Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)WLN135
Y.R. Meena, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and also perused the documents on record.2. The fourth bail application was dismissed on 6.9.96 with a direction to trial Court to complete the trial within three months. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that only two witnesses have been examined so far, and the other co-accused persons, who are released on bail are absconding, therefore, the completion of trial may take time and petitioner is in custody since 3.8.95.3. Mr. Dhand submits that the petitioner is also involved in three other cases.4. Learned Public Prosecutor has not controverted the above facts.5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by both the sides, I am inclined to grant bail Under Section 439 Cr. P.C. to accused petitioner.6. It is, therefore, ordered that the accused petitioner Abhijeet Singh @ Gouri S/o Parmendra Singh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes ...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Smt. Nathi Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC229; 1997(1)WLN136
R.R. Yadav, J.1. Heard.2. Perused the judgments given by both the courts below.3. Instant Second Appeal is concluded by concurrent findings of fact and no substantial question of law is involved, therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.4. The learned Counsel for appellant urged before me that both the courts below have not properly addressed the documentary evidence Ex. A/1 which was exhibited. According to Shri J.L. Purohit once the aforesaid document was exhibited its admissibility Cannot be questioned.5. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the present case and also the anxiety of the defendant-appellant about raising the aforesaid question at two courts below I consider it proper to examine the same.6. Having inherent limitations in Second Appeal relating to reappraisal of evidence suffice it to observe that Ex. A/1 has no bearing on merits of the case as envisaged under Section 167 of Indian Evidence Act which provides that improper admission or r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »