Rajasthan Court March 2004 Judgments
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Parvati Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1828; 2004(3)WLC145
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This is the civil first appeal by the defendant-tenants (hereinafter referred to as the 'defendants') against the judgment and decree of eviction dated 4.3.1997 passed by the learned Additional Distt. Judge No. 6, Jaipur City, Jaipur.2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiff- respondents No. 1 to 3 filed a civil suit for arrears of rent and eviction on 2.12.1987 with the averments that the suit house known as 'Sansar Villa' situated at M.I. Road, Jaipur was let out by the original landlord D.N. Sen at monthly rent of Rs. 230/-. The tenancy commenced with effect from 1.1.1954. D.N. Sen expired in September, 1967. The defendants started paying rent to Raghuveer Sen son of D.N. Sen. The monthly-rent was enhanced to Rs. 270/-w.e.f. 1.11.1962. Raghuveer Sen had filed a civil suit No. 101/80. During the pendency of that civil suit, monthly rent was paid at the rate of Rs. 500/-. Hence, the suit was got dismissed in default on 15.7.1983.3. Thereafter, the suit hou...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shanti Devi (Since Dead Represented by L.Rs.) and ors. Vs. Ram Na ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Raj232; 2004(3)WLC85
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. This Special Appeal, preferred by defendant appellants, arises out of the judgment and decree dated November 9, 1984 of the learned single Judge whereby Civil Regular First Appeal of the plaintiff respondents was allowed and suit instituted by them to enforce the right of pre-emption was decreed.2. Contextual facts depict that suit for pre-emption was filed on October 3, 1960 by plaintiff respondents in the Court of Senior Civil Judge No. 1 Jaipur City. The defendant No. 1 in the written statement denied the existence of the custom of preemption and in the alternative contended that the plaintiff was estopped from claiming pre-emption as he never expressed his wish to purchase the property when the sale in favour of the defendant was brought to their knowledge nor did they make the necessary Talabs which were indispensable for them to perform for claiming the right of preemption. Learned Senior Civil Judge considered the question of Talabs under two parts (1) wh...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Chandra Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2474; 2004(3)WLC363
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 4.11.03 against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the order of suspension dtd. 14.10.2003 (Annex.P/l) passed by the respondent No. 1 (State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Jaipur) under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1994) be quashed and set aside as on that date no criminal proceedings were pending against the petitioner.2. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under:i) That the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Mozpura, Panchayat Samiti, Asind in the general elections held in January, 2000.ii) Further case of the petitioner is that due to political rivalry, a report was lodged against the petitioner in the Police Station Badnaur, Dist. Bhilwara and the basis of that report, a FIR (Annex...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Rai and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2640; 2004(3)WLC246
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Appellant Ram Rai and his wife appellant Shanti Devi seek to quash the judgment dated June 16, 2000 of the learned Sessions Judge Jaipur District rendered in Sessions Case No. 87/1997 whereby they were convicted and sentenced as under:- Ram Rai:- Under Section 302 IPC to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/ in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Under Section 201 IPC to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Shanti Devi: Under Section 201/34 IPC to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for for two years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.Substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Brief facts are these:-On March 31, 1997 at 9.35 PM one Nanag Ram (P.W.5) informed the SHO Police Station Chaksu that a bag was floating in the well of Jatiji. The SHO rushed to the spot and...
Tag this Judgment!Praveen Sahani and anr. (Ku.) Vs. Smt. Sushila Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-11-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Raj206; RLW2004(3)Raj1400; 2004(2)WLC780
A.C. Goyal, J.1. The defendants-appellants seek to quash the judgment and decree dated 3.7.1999 whereby the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur decreed the suit of pre-emption in respect of the suit property. The parties shall be referred hereinafter in the same manner as they were arrayed in the plaint.2. The plaintiff Smt. Sushila Devi filed a civil suit on 24.1.1996 with the averments that there storied house No. 515 is situated at Namak-Ki-Mandi, Kishanpole Bazar, Jaipur, which has been shown in the map annexed the to plaint. The property shown is yellow colour in the annexed map belongs to the plaintiff, the property shown in red colour belongs to the defendant No. 2 Smt. Prem Devi, the property shown in green colour belongs to one Sh. Kaluram and the area shown in blue colour belongs jointly to the plaintiff, the defendant No. 2 and Kaluram. The property shown in the red colour was sold by the second defendant to the first defendant, Kumari Praveen Sahni ...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-11-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2463
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. These appeals arise out of the judgment datedJune 24, 2000 of the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases)Jaipur whereby the three appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:-Mahendra Singh and Ishaq @ Yusuf:U/S. 302 IPC to undergo Imprisonment for life and fine ofRs. 500/- in default to further suffer simpleimprisonment for three months.U/S 302/120B IPC to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine ofRs. 500/- in default to further suffer simpleimprisonment for three months.U/S 201 IPC to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for fiveyears and fine of Rs. 500/- in default tofurther suffer simple imprisonment for threemonths.Babu Lal:U/s. 302/120B IPC to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine ofRs. 500/- in default to further suffer simpleimprisonment for three months.U/s 201/120B IPC to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for fiveyears and fine of Rs. 500/- in default tofurther suffer simple imprisonment for three months.Substantive sentences were ordered...
Tag this Judgment!Budh Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-11-2004
Reported in: RLW2004(4)Raj2646; 2004(3)WLC200
F.C. Bansal, J.1. The instant jail appeal is directed against the judgment dated May 26, 2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City whereby appellant Budh Singh has been convicted under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for one month and to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's imprisonment respectively.2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on July 28, 1998 at 2.50 p.m. Parcha-Bayan Ex.P12 of PW11 Arjun Singh S/o Shri Kesar Singh, by caste-Rajput, aged 35 years, R/o-Khudsya, P.S. Gangapur City was recorded byPW14 Ramkaran, AS1, P.S. Gangapur City wherein it was interalia stated by Arjun Singh that Budh Singh is his elder brother. Except one house they had divided their land and other properties and are i...
Tag this Judgment!Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanda and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-2004
Reported in: III(2004)ACC628; RLW2004(3)Raj1863; 2004(3)WLC128
S.K. Keshote, J.1. These special appeals arise out of the accident took place on 6.10.1994 and thus the same are taken up for hearing and being decided together by this common judgment.2. These appeals relate to both-fatal accident and injuries.3. The amount of compensation also varied in these cases looking to the facts thereof.4. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kekri, District Ajmer, (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide its judgment dated 20.9.2000, decided the claim cases of the claimant respondents. Though, the appeals against the judgment of the learned Tribunal filed before the learned Single Judge, have been decided by separate orders.5. The offending vehicle, undisputedly, was the Truck bearing No. RSZ-5851. The deceased and injured were the passengers/occupants in the offending Truck which met with accident.6. Before the learned Tribunal, the non-claimant No. 3 appellant-the Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Ajmer (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'the app...
Tag this Judgment!Arun Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3796
ORDERN.N. Mathru, J.1. By way of instant petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C., petitioner has challenged the order dated 5-4-2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nimbahera refusing to interfere with the order dated 9-1-2003 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dungla rejecting petitioner's application for delivery of seized Maruti Car under the provisions of Sections 451 and 457 Cr. P. C.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 31-10-2002, a written report was lodged by one Ramlal at Police Station, Dungla stating inter alia that in the midnight at about 2 a.m., he received a telephonic message from his brother to the effect that some unknown person entered into the house in village Biloda and broke open the doors and committed theft of jewellery. He rushed to the house and found that the almirah was broken and jewellery was taken away. On this report, police registered a case for the offence Under Sections 457 and 380, I.P.C. and proceede...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal S/O Gheesaji Chamar Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3640
B. Prasad, J.1. This appeal has been filed by appellant Hiralal against the judgment dated 5-8-1999 passed by the learned Special Judge, N. D. P. S. Cases, Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No. 4/1998 whereby he was found guilty for the offence under Section 8/18 of N. D. P. S. Act and has been awarded 12 years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo 1 year R. I.2. The prosecution story in nut-shell is to the effect that on 14-10-1997 in the day at about 3' o clock, P. W. 8 M. K. Pippal, Sub-Inspector, Narcotics Bureau, Neemuch received a secret information to the effect that four residents of village Chiksi were in possession of illicit opium. The information was recorded in writing in DRI and submitted to Shri P.K. Sinha, Superintendent, Office of Assistant Narcotics Commissioner, Neemuch and the copy of information allegedly dispatched to the Assistant Commissioner, Narcotics, Gwalior by P.K. Sinha, Superintendent, P. W. 9. On the information, ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »