Rajasthan Court August 2005 Judgments
Hasim Ali Khan Vs. Kalu
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj3002; 2005(4)WLC525
K.C. Sharma, J.1. Through appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(u) read with Section 104 C.P.C., the defendant appellant seeks to quash the order dated 17.8.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Jaipur, by which the learned Judge has allowed the application filed by the defendant appellant under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and remanded the case to the learned Trial Court with the direction to afford opportunity to lead evidence on the issue of reasonable and bona fide necessity to both the parties and then to decide the suit afresh.2. The plaintiff respondent filed a suit against the defendant appellant for eviction and permanent injunction on the grounds of default in payment of rent, change of user and reasonable and bonafide necessity of the suit premises for his son. Both the parties contested the suit. At the conclusion of trial, the learned Trial Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for eviction and permanent ...
Tag this Judgment!Vishram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4443; RLW2005(4)Raj2815; 2005(4)WLC597
F.C. Bansal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.11.2000 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases and Additional Sessions Judge, Alwar whereby accused appellant Vishram has been convicted under Sections 376 and 392 IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer R.I. for six months and R.I. for three years and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer R.I. for three months respectively. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. However, the accused-appellant has been acquitted of the charge under Section 3(2) (v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.2. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 3.10.99 'Parcha-Bayan' Ex.P3 of Smt. Ramu Devi (PW2) was recorded by the SHO, P.S. Rajgarh, District Alwar in Zanana Hospital, Rajgarh wherein it was stated by her that yesterday at a...
Tag this Judgment!Mahaveer Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2987; 2006(1)WLC19
J.R. Goyal, J.1. This appeal, under Section 374 Cr.P.C., is directed against the judgment dated 28.9.1999 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Baran, in Sessions Case No. 75/1998, whereby the accused appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further undergo sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment; and under Section 341 IPC sentenced to one month's rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The case set up by the prosecution is that a writ report, Ex.P.11, was submitted by PW.12-complainant Abdul Alim, to the SHO police station Kotwali Baran at about 10.50 PM on 17.6.1998 with the averments that he being driver, was driving the jeep owned by Maqsood on 17.6.1998. Both Maqsood and Kailash Suman were sitting in the jeep for Mathna. At about 9 PM when they reached the bridge (puliya) near Village Mathna the road was found blocked with stones. He along with Maqsood and ...
Tag this Judgment!Mangal Chand Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)WLC711
K.S. Rathore, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 16.8.2005 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Sikar (Election Tribunal) by which the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 by the petitioner for rejecting the election petition has been dismissed.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the election petition does not disclose any cause of action to the election petitioner. The election petition is based on vague facts and no particular with regard to fraud and illegality was given in the election petition.3. In support of his submissions, learned Counsel placed reliance on the judgment in case of Lalit Kishore Chaturvedi v. Jagdish Prasad Thada and Ors. 1990 Supp. SCC 248 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:An election petition filed under Section 81 is required by Section 83(1) to contain concise statement of the material facts on which petitioner relies. Statutory compulsion visualised by Section 83(1)(b) to ...
Tag this Judgment!Dalpat Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj161; 2005(4)WLC378
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The petitioner who is a social worker has preferred this writ petition challenging the action of the respondents that interest of public at large is involved. The writ present petition was earlier registered as DB Civil Writ Petition as a public interest litigation and placed before the Division Bench and the Division Bench vide order dated 4.3.05 having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner observed that prima facie no public interest element is involved in the matter to entertain the petition and further observed that the petitioner in person is suffering from the action of the respondent therefore, the matter was ordered to be listed before the single Bench.2. Since the matter is referred by the Division Bench observing that the petitioner is personally aggrieved by the action of the respondents and policy framed by the State/National Highways Authority and Union of India has not properly been followed, as also the policy and guidelines for allotment of ret...
Tag this Judgment!Praveen Kumar Vs. Shyam Dass
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj27; RLW2005(4)Raj3008; 2005(4)WLC568
V.K. Bali, J.1. Ayodhya Bai, who was not blessed with any child and at the relevant time when she executed Will dated 6.9.1969 bequeathing all her properties to Geeta Press, had lost her husband as well. She did adopt Praveen Kumar son of her husband's brother Gopi Kishan but, as mentioned above, preferred that all her properties should go to Geeta Press, thus debarring her adoptive son to inherit the said properties by way of natural succession. Ayodhya Bai breathed her last on 14.4.1970 and on her demise, the executors of the will named above made an application Under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of a probate with regard to the Will said to have been executed by Ayodhya Bai on 6.9.1969. The matter was contested by the adoptive son of Ayodhya Bai namely Praveen Kumar and Gopi Kishan, natural father of Praveen Kumar. Learned Distt. Judge, Ajmer, vide orders dated 22.12.1978 dismissed application of the executors. Aggrieved, the executors of the Will filed an appea...
Tag this Judgment!Kamla Devi and ors. Vs. Nand Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj3033
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-landlord earlier filed a suit for eviction against their tenant-deceased Madanlal, which was registered as Civil Original Suit No. 26/89. In that suit ground for eviction was default in payment of rent by the tenant. In the above suit No. 26/89, the Trial Court determined the arrears of rent under Section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 and directed defendant-tenant to pay or deposit the arrears of rent and monthly rent month by month during trial of the suit. The defendant complied with the court's order and paid the rent of the suit premises in the suit No. 26/89. Ultimately, the suit No. 26/89 of the plaintiff was decided by the judgment and decree dated 16.2.1991 and the court declared the tenant-defendant defaulter in payment of rent but no decree for eviction was passed against the tenant on the ground of default in payment of rent b...
Tag this Judgment!Munshi Khan, Deena, Sahabala, Jekam and Khurshid Khan Etc. Vs. State o ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4767; RLW2006(1)Raj167; 2005(4)WLC693
V.K. Bali, J.1. Whether testimony of Rashid, the injured eye-witness, should be believed, wholly or in part, is the sole but significant question involved in the present case. Before, however, we take into consideration the rival contentions of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, on the question framed above, it would be appropriate to give relevant facts culminating in filing of the present criminal appeal bearing No. 77/2002 and Revision No. 561/2002.2. The occurrence leading to death of Mazid, as per the prosecution version, had taken place on 22-2-1999 at 4 p.m. FIR with regard to the incident came to be lodged by Rashid (P.W. 3) on the same very day at 6.45 p.m. Special report with regard to the incident reached the concerned Magistrate on 23-2-1999.3. While unfolding the prosecution version, Rashid who himself got injured in the same very incident leading to the death of Mazid, stated that on the day of occurrence at about 4 in the evening, he and his brother Mazid wer...
Tag this Judgment!Satyapal Kaswan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)SLJ269(Raj); 2004WLC(Raj)UC42
ORDERGovind Mathur, J.1. Admit.2. With the consent of parties this petition is heard for final disposal.3. The petitioner, an Ex. Army Personnel, in pursuant to a notification dated 18.1.2003 submitted an application to consider his candidature for the purpose of appointment to the post of Constable in Rajasthah Police in District Sriganganagar. The petitioner qualified written test and also physical efficiency test by remaining first in 1000 meters run, however, his candidature was rejected by the respondents by treating him suffered with flat foot. Being aggrieved by the same the petitioner preferred a writ petition SBCWP No. 3270/ 2003 before this Court which came to be accepted by judgment dated 14.10.2003 in following terms:As such, the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner for the post in question by constituting a Medical Board, which will re-examine the case of petitioner with regard to his physical fitness. Medical Board so constituted will give a date on which...
Tag this Judgment!Badri Lal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-29-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj16
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Three 'History Sheeters', as per the ocular evidence were cruelly murdered by the assailants with fire arms and sharp edged weapons but the autopsy reports did not reveal gun shot injuries. This consistency persuaded learned Counsel to canvass that conviction of the appellants was virtually a 'moral conviction'. The question therefore emerges in these appeals is as to whether the distance of the prosecution story between 'may be true' and 'must be true' is bridged by legal reliable and unimpeachable evidence.2. As many as seventeen accused persons faced trial in Sessions Cases No. 83/2001, 137/2000 and 60/2002 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1 (Fast Track) Kota (for short 'trial judge') who vide Judgments dated September 22, 2001, November 22, 2001 and September 23, 2003 acquitted three but conviction and sentenced fourteen as under:(1) Prabhu Lal, (2) Ram Charan, (3) Akheraj, (4) Nand Bihari, (5) Shiv Prasad, (6) Durga Shankar, (7) Bhagirath, (...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »