Rajasthan Court January 2007 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.
Shivlal Vs. Sukhdev Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN85
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The appellant/defendant is aggrieved against the findings of fact recorded by two Courts below in the judgments dated 24.9.2001 and 24.7.2006 passed by the trial Court and First Appellate Court respectively.3. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent filed suit for injunction against the defendant/appellant alleging that the appellant encroached upon the land of lane measuring 2.9 feet to 1.9 feet x 18 feet of public way and raise a platform and latrine over the said encroached land causing nuisance for the plaintiff.4. Two Courts below concurrently held that the land in dispute is land of public way and the appellant failed to prove the constructed platform and latrine within his pattasud land despite the fact that the appellant's positive case was that the construction which he raised in recent past was within the pattasud area of the house of the appellant.5. It appears from the facts of the case that two ...
Navneet @ Nageshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN339
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. I have heard learned Counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order.2. The contention of learned Counsel is that in fact, after inordinate delay subsequently statements of some of the witnesses recorded wherein they have changed their earlier version. It has been contended that dying declaration of the deceased specifically states that under wrong notion, the deceased took some poisonous substance from a bottle considering the same to be a medicine. It has further been contended that mother, brother, uncle and all the family members, whose statements were recorded after the incident, none of them stated that there was any harassment given to the deceased by the in-laws or threatening given for bringing less dowry. It has also been argued that all the statements would go to show that deceased was treated well in her in-laws house. His further submission is that after one and a half...
Kishan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN107
Satya Prakash Pathak, J.1. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order.2. The contention of learned Counsel is that in the dying declaration the deceased has stated that she caught fire while preparing meal. His submission is that even while the deceased was under treatment, she disclosed that she caught fire herself. His next submission is that after 10 years of marriage, the incident has occurred, therefore, it cannot be said that it is a case under Section 498-A or 306 IPC.3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.4. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I think it just and proper to enlarge the accused petitioner on bail.5. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Kishan Singh S/o Ranjeet Singh by caste Rajput shall be released on...
Harak Lal Vs. Manak Chand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN414
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant.2. The appellant/plaintiff is aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 26.7.2004 passed by the First Appellate Court reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 17.11.2003 and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.3. According to the plaintiff/appellant, the First Appellate Court committed serious error of law in reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Court because of the reason that the First Appellate Court considered other accommodations of the plaintiff which were in fact residential and could not have been used for commercial purposes by the appellant/plaintiff.4. I have considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the reasons given by the First Appellate Court as well as the facts of the case.5. The plaintiff's son himself in his evidence admitted that adjoining to the shop in dispute, there is room of the plaintiff measuring 8 feet X 10 feet and the explanation ...
Roshan Lal Vs. Lrs. of Late Shri Shanker Lal Lakhara
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN469
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant.2. The appellant/defendant is aggrieved against the concurrent findings of fact recorded by two courts below in the judgments dated 20.05.2000 and 13.10.2004 passed by the trial Court and First Appellate Court respectively.3. The plaintiff deceased Shanker Lal filed suit for injunction against the defendant/appellant claiming his right over the lane situated in between the houses of the plaintiff himself and the defendant and also claimed easementary right on the basis of his 2 windows, 2 ventilators and water outlet which according to the plaintiff, he constructed more than 20 years ago. He was enjoying the benefit of air, light and drainage for more than 20 years from the time of filing of the suit. The defendant put stone slabs to close the way of lane.4. The trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff and directed the defendant to remove the stone slabs obstructing the way and restrained the defendant from putting any ob...
Narendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN218
H.R. Panwar, J.1. By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of order Annex.P-5 dt. 27.05.2003 and a direction for grant of consequential benefits and third selection grade w.e.f. 03.03.2000.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Constable with the respondent Police Department under the provisions of Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 (for short 'the Rules of 1989' hereinafter) on 03.03.1972. The State Government by the order Annex.1 dt. 25.01.1992, with a view to provide relief to the employees of certain categories, made a provision for grant of selection grade on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of satisfactory service. The first selection grade shall be granted from the day following the day on which one completes service of nine years, provided that the employee has not got one promot...
Gopali (Smt.) Vs. Laxmi Narain
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-02-2007
Reported in: RLW2007(1)Raj592
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant wife seeks to quash the order dated October 12, 1998 of Family Court No. 1, Jaipur whereby the decree of divorce was granted in favour of the respondent husband on the ground of cruelty and desertion.2. Contextual facts depict that the respondent husband in the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act averred that he entered into the marriage with Gopali (appellant) on May 12, 1981 and from their wedlock a male child was born on February 10, 1982. The wife thereafter treated him cruelly and left his house in May, 1982 leaving behind the child. The application seeking restoration of conjugal rights was filed by the wife which stood disposed of in July, 1984 on the basis of compromise and she started residing with him. Since she treated him cruelly and deserted him, he was entitled to the decree of divorce.3. The appellant wife submitted reply to the application denying the allegations levelled against her in the application. As many as th...
Kanhaialal Jangid Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-02-2007
Reported in: (2008)217CTR(Raj)354
1. The appeal was admitted on 15th Oct., 2001. The substantial question of law that arises for consideration of this appeal were not framed at the time of admission. The assessee appellant in his memo of appeal has raised following questions as substantial questions of law:1. Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in upholding the addition of Rs. 32,000 in the hands of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1991-92 which represented the cash credits taken by the assessee from one Sri Ramulal and Shri Devendra Sankhla ?2. Whether, the learned Tribunal was justified in upholding of addition to the extent of 1/4th of depreciation and Rs. 1,000 on account of expenditure on books and periodicals ?Question Nos. 3 and 4 referred to an amount in appeal are general and does not relate to any specific subject-matter.2. So far as question No. 2 is concerned we find that the AO has considered the claim of the assessee for allowing as deduction the expenses incurred by him on purchase of books, periodi...
Madanlal Vs. Anar Devi and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN5
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant.2. The plaintiffs filed a suit for possession on the basis of patta dated 19.03.1948 alleging that originally patta was granted by the Erstwhile State of Jodhpur. However, the patta was lost, therefore, new patta was obtained on 19.03.1948. The plaintiffs in their plaint admitted that 15 years before filing of the suit, another patta was issued by Gram Panchayat, Borawar despite the fact that the plaintiffs were in possession of the suit property. The patta holder sold the property and on the strength of said patta and sale deed, the defendants entered upon the property in dispute in 1976. The plaintiffs challenged the sale deed as well as patta issued subsequently by the Gram Panchayat, Borawar.3. The defendants submitted written statement and pleaded that the plaintiffs were never in possession of the property nor the Jagirdar of Erstwhile State of Jodhpur had a right to grant patta. The defendants also pleaded that they pur...
Nathu Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)WLN22
Bhagwati Prasad, J.1. The present writ petition is filed against the acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents. The case of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that Agricultural Marketing Board has issued instructions vide Annx.1. Before any requirement of land is made out the guidelines as provided in Annx. 1 have to be adhered to. The petitioners have expressed doubts if the Secretary concerned has adhered to Annx. 1. This defect not withstanding, the acquisition proceedings has been challenged on merit. It has been stated that earlier an acquisition proceeding was initiated which was challenged by the petitioner in this Court by Writ Petition No. 100/1982. In this writ petition, an agreement was filed in between the petitioner and the respondent and on the basis of that agreement the writ petition was disposed off as withdrawn.2. In terms of the agreement, possession of certain lands were given to the petitioner and his land, which was part of the acquisition p...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »