Rajasthan Court October 2009 Judgments
R.R. Narpat Singh and ors. Vs. Yuv Raj Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-30-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Raj15
N.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiffs, whose suit was dismissed by the learned trial Court as well as the learned single Judge. The appellants now are the legal representatives of the original plaintiff. Likewise some of the respondents are also legal representatives of the original defendants.2. For the present brief facts may be recapitulated, being, that the plaintiff filed the present suit for declaration arid possession on 18-1 -1955, alleging inter alia, that the plaintiff being Jagirdar of village Surpura, and had two younger brothers, being Bakhat Singh and Ranjit Singh defendant. Out of them Bakhat Singh moved application before the Chief Minister for maintenance, and he was awarded Rs. 40/- per month for maintenance, and Rs. 1500/- for constructing residential house, and that Ranjit Singh was also started being paid Rs. 40/- per month, and when he was offered Rs. 1500/- for construction of house in April, 1946, he declined to receive the same, on one gro...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India Vs. Sharda Spuntex Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-22-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Raj1
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.BY THE COURT:1. In this revision petition, the petitioner State Bank of India, Bhilwara is challenging order dated 29.05.2009 passed by the District Judge, Bhilwara in Civil Original Suit No. 126/2009, by which, the learned District Judge dismissed the application filed by the petitioner Bank under Order VII Rule 11, C.P.C.2. Facts of the case indicate that plaintiff-respondent filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the action of the Bank for declaring company's bank accounts as NPA and making debit entries. Along with the said suit, application for temporary injunction was filed. Upon service of summonses/notices issued in the said suit, petitioner Bank filed application under3. In the application filed under Order VII Rule 11, C.P.C., it is stated by the petitioner Bank that the original suit itself is barred by provisions of Section 34 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 200...
Tag this Judgment!Hari and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-07-2009
Reported in: 2010CriLJ308
K.S. Chaudhari, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 21-4-2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Hindauncity by which he convicted accused-appellant-Kadu under Section 302, I. P. C. and other accused-appellants Hari, Pattal alias Suraj Mai and Ram Niwas under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced each accused to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are, that PW-3 Vikram Singh lodged F.I.R. Ex, P/1 on 30th July, 2001 at 2.15 p.m. and stated that on 30th July, 2001 at 9.30 p.m. his father Narayan along with his mother Kampuri, sister Kinni (Kinni) went to their field. Kadu, Ran Niwas, Hari, Dharam Singh, Pattal, Kailash, Kishanpal, Keshanti, Barfi armed with Gandasi, Farsa, Sela, Lathi were sitting in the field and Hari was tilling field by tractor. Narayan requested Hari not to till the field then all accused-persons b...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›