Rajasthan Court February 2010 Judgments

Chandmal @ Kundan Soni Vs. Govind Ram

Court: Rajasthan

Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels.2. This writ petition is directed against the order dtd.20.2.2008 passed by the learned Trial Court and the order dtd.3.1.2009 passed by the appellate Court allowing the application of the respondent - plaintiff - landlord under Section 13(5) of the Rent Control Act, 1950 and striking off the defence of the petitioner - defendant - tenant. The learned Courts below have observed that after determination of rent under Section 13(3) of the Act, there were several defaults on the part of the petitioner - defendant - tenant in deposit of rent in the Court and therefore, in view of Section 13(5) of the Act, the defence of the defendant deserves to be struck off.3. Being aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of present writ petition.4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in fact the petitioner - defendant had deposited the advance rent for the period in question e.g. For the period from 1.12.2...

Mohan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Govind Mathur, J.1. This revision petition as per provisions of Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. is preferred to assail validity, correctness and propriety of the judgment dated 7.9.1994 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pali in Criminal Appeal No. 15/1994, affirming the judgment dated 5.2.1994 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali convicting the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The trial court after recording conviction as above, sentenced the petitioner for six months' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment.2. While challenging the judgments impugned, the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the trial court failed to appreciate that the formalities referred under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act of 1954...

Kumbha Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

ORDER1. State has preferred leave to appeal application, whereby, the State has sought to challenge the judgment dated 24.03.2009 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Balotra (Headquarters Barmer) in Sessions Case No. 71/08 (46/08), whereby, accused-respondents were acquitted from the charge for commission of offences under Sections 498A, 304B /alternatively 302, I.P.C. Another revision petition has been filed by the complainant against the same judgment. Hence, this common order in both these cases.2. It is contended by the learned Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned Counsel for the complainant that the judgment impugned is totally erroneous and passed without application of mind. The prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt for committing offences under Sections 498A and 304 Part B, I.P.C. but the learned trial Court without appreciating the prosecution evidence acquitted the accused- respondents from the charges levelled against them which is co...

Narendra Kumar Vs. Chaturbhuj Das Rikhabh Das and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Vineet Kothari, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dtd.25.3.2008 whereby the learned trial Court in a suit filed for eviction against the defendants - tenants held that the agreement dtd.4.5.1991 was a partition-deed which requires registration as per Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act and in absence of the same, the said document was not admissible in evidence and therefore, the plaintiff Narendra Kumar could not have right to maintain the suit in question.2. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff - petitioner submits relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshan Singh v. Zile Singh reported in AIR 1988 (SC) 881 that the said family arrangement is merely a document regarding family arrangement between the members of the family and the same does not amount to partition and therefore, no registration of the said document was necessary in order to make it admissible in evidence. He further submits that question of title is not relevant in...

Ram Narayan and ors. Vs. Smt. Asha Devi and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

H.R. Panwar, J.1. All these aforementioned civil second appeals and civil revisions involve identical question of law and facts and therefore, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties they are heard and decided together taking the facts of SBCSA No. 139/09 Ram Narayan v. Smt. Asha Devi as a leading case.2. Briefly stated the facts to the extent they are relevant and necessary for the decision of these appeals and revisions are that the plaintiff respondent Smt. Asha Devi filed a civil suit against firm Ram Narayan Om Prakash for eviction of the disputed premises after serving notice under Section 106 r/w Section 114(h) of the Transfer of Property Act dated 6.10.2003. The suit came to be decreed by judgment and decree dated 16.8.2007 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 4, Bikaner (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter), against which, one Ram Narayan the appellant herein filed an appeal before Additional District Judge No. 2, Bikaner (for short 'the first...

Vinod Vs. Smt. Sangeeta

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: AIR2010Raj68

Vineet Kothari, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-husband Mr. Vinod being aggrieved by the judgment of the District Judge, Pratapgarh District Chittorgarh rejecting his application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce from respondent Smt. Sangita.2. The brief facts of the case as per appellant are that the appellant-petitioner filed a divorce petition against the respondent for granting decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The respondent whenever lived with the appellant, she treated the appellant and his family persons with cruelty. She used to quarrel with the family members and use irony and filthy language and never paid respect and regards to the family members and oftenly caused damage to the property of the petitioner unnecessarily and by this fact the respondent created mental cruelty in the mind of appellant and she also not allowed the appellant to have a co-habitation and as such the respondent created the mental cruelty and the li...

L.Rs. of Late Sumer Chand and ors. Vs. Laxmi Chand

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: RLW2010(2)Raj1435

H.R. Panwar, J.1. This civil first appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 29.1.2002 passed by Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur (for short 'the trial Court' hereinafter) whereby the suit filed by the respondent-Laxmi Chand against Sumer Chand and Ors. for possession of the suit premises and mesne profit, was decreed.2. Briefly stated facts to the extent they are relevant and necessary for the decision of the appeal as also cross-objection filed by the respondent-plaintiff Laxmi Chand are that the respondent-plaintiff Laxmi Chand filed a suit against Sumer Chand and three others, the appellants herein are the legal representatives of Sumer Chand, on the ground that immovable property i.e. residential house situated at Chandi Hall, Jodhpur was originally owned by Ummed Chand, the father of defendant-Sumer Chand and plaintiff-Laxmi Chand. The said immovable property was partitioned by a registered partition-deed on 14.11.1974. The plaintiff claimed that he was in ...