Rajasthan Court March 1999 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.
Pukh Raj and ors. Vs. Ahmed Bhai and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)WLN461
R.R. Yadav, J.1. The instant revision petition has been filed against the order dated 5.01.1995, whereby the learned trial court has rejected the application of the tenant-defendant-revisonists moved under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code refusing to stay the proceedings of subsequent Original Civil Suit No. 357/93 under the aforesaid Section on the ground that the matter in issue involved in the abovementioned suit is not directly and substantially in issue in the previously instituted suit between the same parties.2. Indisputably, the previously instituted suit for eviction was founded on two causes of action. One of sub-letting and the other of reasonable and bonafide necessity of the land lord-plaintiff-non petitioners as envisaged under Clause (e) and Clause (h) of Sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act No. 17 of 1950) which was filed by the land lord plaintiff-non petitioners agains...
Rae Barley Flour Mills Ltd. and Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-11-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Raj56
ORDERJ.C. Verma, J.1. All these writ petitions involve similar facts and law. The only point involved and as argued by the counsel forthe petitigner is as to from which date the notification as published in the Government gazette in regard to Rajasthan Trade Articles (Licensing and Control) Order, 1980 (hereinafter called as the control order) is to be made effective. For the purpose of disposal of all these writ petitions, the facts are being taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1264/ 97 Rae Barley Flour Mills Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan.2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that unless the notification is published in the gazette and also released for the information of the public no penal consequences can flow against the citizen out of the notification prior to the date of release of such published notification for information of the public.3. The petitioners are the traders engaged in the business of purchase and sale, storage for sale of wheat and its products, it is stated tha...
Smt. Shimla Devi Vs. Kuldeep Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Raj181; I(2001)DMC8; 1999(3)WLC285
ORDER1. The appellant-Smt. Shimla Devi is the wife of the respondent-Shri Kuldeep Sharma, who has challenged the judgment and decree dated 16-11 -96 of the learned Judge of the Family Court, Jaipur by which the marriage between the appellant and the respondent has been dissolved and hence a decree of divorce has been passed after recording a finding that the respondent-husband has succeeded in proving his case of desertion alleged by him against the appellant-wife.2. The marriage between the parties was performed on 12th June, 1987 according to the Hindu Rites at Karauli District Sawaimadhopur and thereafter the appellant-wife came to Jaipur along with her husband but on 12th June, 1987 (sic) the brother of the appellant and some other relatives came to take her back and on 19th June, 1987 she went to her parents' place and again on 23-8-87 she came to her husband's place, where she lived till 10-9-87 and thereafter went back to Karauli.3. On 18-10-93 the respondent-husband filed a pet...
A.N. Gupta Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4932; 1999(3)WLC302
Arun Madan, J.1. From the perusal of the summoned record and after hearing learned counsel for the parties at length, prima-facie, I am of the opinion that Investigating Officer of P. S. Sodala has not conducted the fair investigation and the Final Report which was filed by him in pursuance of the FIR dt. 31-10-1991 is also beyond the scope of his powers and jurisdiction. The complainant's story as unfolded by the FIR itself is false and baseless keeping in view the fact that respondent No. 2 Smt. Koka Devi was herself guilty of an offence by having raised unauthorized construction the front side of the wall adjoining the premises of petitioner in such a manner so as to stop the free ingress and outgress of the fresh air and light into the premises of the petitioner. The report to this effect was earlier lodged by the petitioner with the JDA Officials on 26-9-1991 on the basis of which, the JDA Officials had inspected the site and directed respondent No. 2 to remove the 'unauthorized c...
Banshi Lal Nayati Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)WLN453
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. Both these petitions have been filed in respect of the judgment and order dated 13.3.1990 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, by which the order dated 9.4.1985, passed by the District Collector, Chittorgarh, giving compulsory retirement to petitioner - employee Banshi Lal Nayati has been quashed. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2565/1991 has been filed by petitioner-employee for seeking direction to implement the said judgment and order, while S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3877/1991 has been filed by the State for setting aside the said judgment.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to these cases are that petitioner Banshi Lal Nayati entered in the service of the respondents as Patwari on 2.7.1951. He had been given compulsory retirement vide impugned order dated 9.4.1985 (Annexure. 1) in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 244(2) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (for short, 'the Rules'). Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, he prepa...
Ajeet Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3054
ORDERG.L. Gupta, J. 1. Petitioners, through this petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C., seek quashment of the criminal proceedings in Cr. Case No. 243/85 State v. Ajeet Singh and Ors. pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Pali.2. Mr. Parihar, learned counsel for the petitioners, pointing out that the case against the petitioners under Sections 147 and 323, IPC in respect of an occurrence which took place on 27-9-1985 has been pending for the last about 15 years, contended that the petitioners have suffered a lot during this period, and therefore, the proceedings should be quashed. He placed reliance on the cases of Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak AIR 1992 SC 1701 : 1992 Cri LJ 2717 and 'Common Cause' A Registered Society v. Union of India 1996 Cri LR (SC) 430 : 1996 Cri LJ 2380.3. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the hand, contended that the delay in the trial of the case has not been caused because of lapse on the part of the prosecution. He pointed out that the record...
Babulal Agarwal and anr. Etc. Vs. Associate Director and ors. Etc.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3794; 1999WLC(Raj)UC494
ORDERG.L. Gupta, J.1. In all these Misc. petitions under Section 482, Cr. P.C. the question to be considered is whether the proceedings pending against the petitioners, who are manufacturers of the insecticides, should be quashed on the ground that the self life of the insecticide had expired before filing of the complaint against them or before they could be served in the case.2. The contention of Mr. Garg, learned counsel for the petitioners, was that as the complaints were filed in the Court after the expiry of date of insecticides or the petitioners were served after the said date, the petitioners were deprived of their right of retesting of the insecticide by the Central Insecticides Laboratory under Section 24(4) of the Insecticides Act. Relying on the cases of M/s. Bharat Insecticides Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan 1997 (1) WLC (Raj) 657, Bayer India Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan 1997 WLC (Raj) UC 630, M/s. Agro Chemicals v. State of Rajasthan (S. B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 577/93) deci...
Sulekhan Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3798; 1999(3)WLC415; 1999(1)WLN449
N.N. Mathur, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17-12-1980 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar convicting the appellants of offence under Sections 376, 511, I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to undergo 4 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment, to further undergo 6 months' rigorous imprisonment.2. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 19-2-1980 one Shri Diwan Chand lodged a First Information Report at police station Sri Karanpur stating inter alia that his daughter Toshi aged 16 years along with wife of his son Mst. Chindo had gone to the field. At about 1 p.m. Shri Shiv Singh s/o Shri Darshan Singh informed him that about half an hour before, accused-Sulekhan Singh, Sukha Singh and Bansa Singh misbehaved with his daughter Mst. Toshi. He also informed that Mst. Toshi was seen in terrible condition. On enquiry she disclosed that 3 accused persons namely Sulekhan Singh, Bansa Singh and Sukha Singh with inten...
Narang Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)WLC733; 1999(1)WLN586
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant case has a chequerred history as this is the third petition filed by the petitioner.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that in compliance of the order passed by this Court in some case, petitioner and some other persons were given temporary/ad-hoc appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III by the respondents vide order dated 30.9.1991 (Annexure. 1). The aforesaid order made it clear that the said appointment would be subject to the decision of the writ petition or for a period of six months or till the regularly selected candidates were made available. In pursuance of the said order, petitioner joined the service and in the meanwhile, an Advertisement No. 5/91 was issued by the respondents for making regular appointments on the said post. Petitioner applied in pursuance of the said advertisement but as the posts had to be filled-up under a fixed criteria giving preferential treatment to candidates on various grounds, petitioner ...
Naresh Sachdeva Vs. Prithvipal Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)WLC732; 1999(1)WLN314
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Defendant appellant seeks to challenge the order dated January 12, 1999 of the learned Additional District Judge No. 1 Kota whereby provisional rent under Section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (for short the Rent Act) has been determined.2. Brief 'resume' of the facts is that the plaintiff respondents (for short the landlord) instituted suit for ejectment and recovery of rent in respect of tenanted property against the defendant appellant (for short the tenant) on December 18, 1997 on the ground of default in payment of rent alleged to be due since March 5, 1996 to November 30, 1997 on the date of presentation of plaint. It was averred that the tenant agreed to pay Rs. 39,172/- per month as rent and rent deed was executed by him on November 16, 1995. The tenant filed written statement on July 8, 1998. Learned trial court vide impugned order determined the rent under Section 13(3) of the Rent Act).3. What was vehemently ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »