Rajasthan Court January 1998 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.
Shamlal Vs. Mansha Bai
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1998
Reported in: I(1999)DMC468
Mohd. Yamin, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of learned Judge, Family Court, Jodhpur dated 13.5.1997 by which he ordered the petitioner to pay Rs. 350/- per month to each of his children Rinku and Kirti from the date of application submitted under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Counsel for the respondents.3. Mansha Bai was married to Shyamlal. Out of this wedlock two children were born. It was alleged in the petition that the wife and two minor children were kicked out of the house by the petitioner and he was not maintaining them for last 7 years. They were kicked out without any cause and have been neglected by the petitioner. He has refused to maintain them. The minor children Rinku and Kirti were living with their mother who was living with her mother as her father has already expired. They do not have any source of income and are unable to maintain themselves. The petitioner was a rail...
Shyamlal Vs. Mansha Bai
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2704
ORDERMohd. Yamin, J. 1. This revision is directed against the order of learned Judge, Family Court, Jodhpur dated 13-5-97 by which he ordered the petitioner to pay Rs. 350/- per month to each of his children Rinku and Kirti from the date of application submitted under Section 125, Cr.P.C.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.3. Mansha Bai was married to Shyamlal. Out of this wedlock two children were born. It was alleged in the petition that the wife and two minor children were kicked out of the house by the petitioner and he was not maintaining them for last 7 years. They were kicked out without any cause and have been neglected by the petitioner. He has refused to maintain them. The minor children Rinku and Kirti were living with their mother who was living with her mother as her father has already expired. They do not have any source of income and are unable to maintain themselves. The petitioner was a railway employee ...
Jagdish Chandra Soni Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1902; 1998(2)WLC86
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J.1. Hcanl Ihe learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.2. This petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is directed against the order dated 18th September, 1990 passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Anoopgarh in Criminal Case No. 88/85 State v. Jagdish Chandra Soni, whereby the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh directed the framing of the charge against the accused petitioner under Section 409 IPC.3. I have carefully gone through the order dated 13th September, 1990 passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh and perused the record of the lower Court. It appears that on 6th August, 1983 the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Anoopgarh Division II, Rajasthan Canal Project, Gharsana sent a written First information report to the Station House Officer of the Police Station, Gharsana. According to the aforesaid first information report, the construction of lining in the Kh...
Manohar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1900
ORDERMohd. Yamin, J. 1. This is a revision against the judgment dated 28-3-89 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Merta in Cr. Appeal No. 15/83 by which the judgment and sentence passed by Special Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur in Cr. Case No. 140/8 I dated 1 8-1 -83 was confirmed. By his judgment the learned Judicial Magistrate had convicted the petitioner under Section 304A IPC and sentenced him to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment and a line of Rs. 200/-. It was further ordered that in case of default of payment of fine the accused petitioner will undergo sentence for one month rigorous imprisonment.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor at length and have gone through the record of the case.3. Briefly slated the facts, as alleged by the prosecution, are that Bhagguram son of Manroop aged about 70 years was admitted in hospital Dcgana where he gave statement to Station House Officer, Degana, that at about 5 p.m. on 25-9-79 he and ...
Hem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3890; 1998WLC(Raj)UC491
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record of the case.2. This criminal revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 7th January, 1987 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Merta in Criminal Appeal No. 30/82 affirming the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class in Criminal Case No. 4/79 whereby the accused-petitioner was convicted under Section 409, IPC and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 500/- and to undergo further simple imprisonment for six months for default in payment of fine.2. The facts of the case so far as they are relevant for the purpose of this petition may be summarised as below :-The petitioner Hem Singh was in the employment of Rajasthan State Roadways Transport Corporation. He was holding the post of the Conductor. On 29th November, 1978 he was working as a Conductor on Bus No. RJL ...
Sikar Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Ram Richhpal Jat
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: 1998(1)WLN13
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant revision impugns the order November 3, 1995 of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div. I) Sikar whereby the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, submitted by the defendant petition (for short the defendant) was rejected.2. The plaintiff non petitioner (for short the plaintiff) instituted a suit in the trial Court on October 9, 1991 seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant from removing, receiving and suspending the plaintiff from the services. As per averments of the plaint the plaintiff was appointed driver on December 22, 1987 by the defendant Co-operative Bank and had apprehension that the defendant Bank might remove him from the services.3. The defendant Bank on May 17, 1994 moved an application under order 7 Rule 11 CPC stating therein that the said Bank was a co-operative Bank registered under the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act 1965 (for short the Act). The dispute arose in the plaint was covere...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Kanchan Bai and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ614; 1999WLC(Raj)UC5
D.C. Dalela, J.1. This case has been listed for final disposal, in the cause-list, in pursuance of the order dated 26.2.1997, passed in the file of Stay Application No. 386 of 1995. Consequently, I have heard the arguments on the merits of the appeal.2. The owner of the vehicle, involved in the accident, has preferred this appeal, feeling aggrieved by the amount of compensation of Rs. 1,64,000, awarded by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chhabra (Baran), in favour of the claimant-respondent Nos. 1 and 2. In this accident, a boy, student of class VIII has died and the learned Tribunal, on the basis of anticipated income, has estimated the value of dependency as Rs. 1,200 per month, after taking into account the future prospects and increase in earnings;. The learned Tribunal determined the multiplier as 10 and with reference to this multiplier, the learned Tribunal assessed the total loss of dependency as Rs. 1,44,000.3. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant ...
Saudagar Singh Vs. Addl. District Magistrate
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)WLC219; 1998(1)WLN11
P.C. Jain, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the legality of the order Ex. 3 dated 29.10.1996 passed by the State Govt. in exercise of its powers conferred by Section 15(2) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceilings on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (for short 'the Act) whereby proceeding for determination of ceiling area were reopened against the petitioner under Chapter III-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act.2. The brief facts of the case are that initially proceedings for determination of ceiling area were initiated against the petitioner under Chapter III-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Raisinghnagar. On enquiry, the Sub-Divisional Officer came to the conclusion that the petitioner did not possess the land in excess of the ceilings fixed under the provisions of the Act and those proceedings were dropped vide order Ex. 1 dated 22.3.1971.3. Thereafter, proceedings for determination of the c...
Sunita Mehta Vs. Ramesh Mehta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-1998
Reported in: I(1998)DMC290
A.K. Parihar, J.1. Presentappeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 8.1.1997, passed by Family Court, Ajmer by which divorce petition, filed by the appellant u/Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been dismissed by the Family Court.2. The marriage took place on 3.12.1992. Out of the wedlock a son was also born on 21.11.1993 at Ajmer. Just after three years of the marriage the divorce petition was filed by the appellant-wife before the Family Court, Ajmer, on the ground of cruelty. Since there was ground of cruelty only, the Family Court framed issues and after taking evidence of both sides, held that ground of cruelty has not been proved at all and thus, dismissed the petition filed by the appellant u/Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, vide order dated 8.1.1997.3. Mr. Sharma, Counsel for the appellant, has vehemently argued that the findings of the learned Family Court are perverse and not based on material on record.4. Contention of Mr. Sharma is that the...
Rajesh Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-05-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1868; 1998(2)WLC316; 1997WLC(Raj)UC423
ORDERArun Madan, J. 1. This revision petition has been preferred before this Court against the order dated 21-8-97 passed by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Alwar by which, the petitioner has been charged for the commission of offences under Sections 120B, 328, 376, 506, 385, 409 and 420, I.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 41/97 on the basis of the FIR No. 328/96 registered with Police Station Kotwali, Alwar.2. The facts which are relevant for deciding this revision petition briefly stated are that an FIR was lodged with Police Station Kotwali, Alwar by the prosecutrix Mst. Rachna Gupta on 17-6-96 with an allegation that she was appointed as a Teacher in the school owned and managed by the petitioner Rajesh Sharma. On the closure of the school by the management, it had resulted in discontinuation of the services of the prosecutrix. Smt. Shalini Sharma wife of the petitioner who was at the relevant time presiding as chair-person of a registered society namely Nav...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »