Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1979Raj1; 1978(11)WLN663
..... has contended that the provisions of section 13-a introduced by the amending act no. 14 of 1976 are supplementary to the provisions of section 13 (5) of the act, 1950, as it existed before the coming into force of the amending act. section 13 (4) and (5) before the amending act no. 14 of 1976 read as under:'13 (4)-- in a suit ..... v. kapoor chand, 1977 raj lw 479 : (air 1978 raj 20) and prabhashanker v. smt. rukmani, 1975 wln 618 : (air 1976 raj 17).7. i am of the view that there is no force in the contention of the appellant for the reasons given as under:8. the rajasthan premises (control of rent & eviction) act, 1950, was amended by the amending ordinance no. 26 ..... of 1975 which was further replaced by act no. 14 of 1976. by the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1985Raj11; 1984()WLN647
..... in the rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act. 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1950') is wider than that of in the east punjab urban rent restriction act. 1949. in view of the first division bench judgment in ghamandi ram v. shanker lal 1965 raj lw 333 : (air 1966 raj 19) (supra) and subsequent decision of the ..... that no tenant shall be ejected from his holding otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this act. the position thus is clear that as soon as the act came into force the respondents acquired khatedari rights under section 15 and could not therefore be ejected. it is because of these provisions that the appellant ..... does not survive the termination of the mortgagee's interest and that the tenant cannot claim the protection of the rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act. 1950 to avert eviction. the division bench declined to follow the judgment of the bombay high court in the aforementiond case, notwithstanding the fact that it was .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2005(3)Raj1585; 2005(2)WLC505
..... court wrongly interpreted section 32 of the rent control act, 2001.5. learned counsel for the petitioners defendant submits that as there is agreed rent ..... which has been sought under the provisions of section 6 of rent control act 1950, which has been repealed w.e.f. 1.4.2003 and admittedly the application for amendment was filed on 19.7.2004, therefore, section 6 of rent control act 1950 was not in force when the application has been filed. it is further submitted that the trial ..... that since the plaintiff respondent no. 1 and 2 filed a civil suit for eviction of property under the provisions of rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act 1950 stating therein that the petitioners are tenant in their premises and the premises was let-out to them in the year 1985 on the agreed rent of rs. 6000 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2003(2)Raj1382; 2002(3)WLN704
..... consideration to the submission made at the bar and have also gone through the impugned order. at the outset, it may be apposite to extract section73 of the rajasthan excise act, 1950, which reads as under:-'73. bar on certain suits- no suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against the state government or against nay officer or person ..... not stopping the vehicle or by attempting to forcibly taking away the vehicle despite attempt by the concerned officer to stop the vehicle. recourse by him to use of force on the driver or occupant of the vehicle was apparently necessary to immobilise the vehicle or to save him from imminent danger of personal risk and the appellant was ..... anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this act or any rule or order made thereunder.'8. in the case of bhappa singh v. rampal singh and ors., air 1982 sc 779, 1982 cr.l.j. 627 the charge levelled by the complainant against the accused was that they had raised his jewellery shop .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1970Raj32; 1970CriLJ300; 1969()WLN71
..... jodhpur. the petitioner prays for the quashing of the order of his commitment to face a trial under section 6(e) of the rajasthan armed constabulary act, 1950, hereinafter called 'the act'.2. the circumstances which have led up to this application, briefly stated, are these. manglaram applicant was appointed as a constable in the rajasthan armed ..... deputy inspector general, commandant or assistant commandant.this portion in brackets will be deleted in the case of officers who are already members of the rajasthan police force on joining the rajasthan armed constabulary.' it is common ground that the petitioner did sign a statement as required by section 4. mere reading over to him ..... clause, and in support of this argument, he relied ou jain bros. and co. bundi v. state of rajasthan, ilr (1963) 13 raj 1063 = (air 1964 raj 17).5. mr. mohanlal shrimal, deputy government advocate argued that the provisions of section 4 are merely directory and not mandatory notwithstanding the fact that the word .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1983Raj100; 1983()WLN314
..... of arrears of rent payable by the petitioner-tenant to the respondent-landlord, in accordance with the provisions of section 13 (3), rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950, as amended to date.2. the facts which may be helpful in appreciating the controversy may be briefly recapitulated here. prem kishore, who is the respondent in this petition ..... under (at p. 4): --'in my view the above provisions apply in a suit filed on or after coming into force of the amending ordinance. however, the legislature was fully aware to deal with the pending suits and other proceedings by way of appeals, application for revisions etc., pending on ..... is covered four-square by a number of decisions of this court. we may start with the judgment reported in carona sahu co. ltd. v. vinod kumar goyal, air 1979 raj 1, which applies on all fours to the facts of this case. one of us (kasliwal j.) who decided the cited case dealt with this point as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1988Raj154; 1987(2)WLN268
..... against the ejectment, by hyper-technical interpretation of sub-sections (2), (3), (4) & (5) of section 13 of the rajasthan premises (control of rent & eviction) act, 1950. 'the pivot of debate in the instant case, therefore, is between the interpretation of rent was in consonance with 'social justice' against the hair splitting interpretation based on blind law ..... willing to pay the rent due along with costs thereof in every such proceeding, the tenant can move an application within 30 days from the date of coming into force of the amending ordinance. clauses (a) to (f) of that section only shows that the protective umbrella was provided in respect of decrees even during pendency ..... (b) to (i) was not considered or adjudicated by that court.18. the calcutta high court in the case of maharam ali v. dinnath prasad sha, 1975 air cj 198 (sic) was also seized with the controversy whether after striking off the defence, the landlord was required to prove that the grounds contained in clauses (a) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1976Raj137
..... passed by the first appellate court has not become final between the parties as it has been challenged in appeal. the amendment of section 14 of the act no. xvii of 1950 has come into force during the pendency of the suit at the appellate stage. order 41, rules 33 and 35, civil procedure code provide for passing of a decree at appellate stage ..... of the statute and not to defeat them. the heading of the section 11 also shows that it lays down the retrospective effect.13. in prabhashanker v. smt. rukamani, air 1976 raj 17 a similar point was raised and hon'ble mr. justice modi has held that no prospective operation to section 14 (2) can be given without doing ..... should not apply to pending appeals also. an appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings end as such it is the suit itself. in lachmeshwar v. keshwar lal, air 1941 fc 5, sir gwyer, c. j. quoted with approval the following observations taken from an american case :--'we have frequently held that in the exercise of our appellate .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1974Raj136; 1974(7)WLN140
..... prasad, air 1949 pat 192 made the following significant observations:--'this document shows that an amount of rs. 10/8/- was remitted by the appellant to the respondent but the money-order was returned to the appellant since it was not accepted by the respondent. section 13, sub-section (3) of the rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950, ..... from ejectment so long as he was willing to pay rent. it was further held that it was not the intention of the law that the tenant should be forced to make useless offer and send money to the landlord by money-order which would without doubt be refused. the provisions of the rajasthan premises (control of rent and ..... inventions and evasions for the continuance of the mischief and pro privato commodo, and to add force and life to the cure and remedy according, to the true intent of the makers of the act pro bono publico. these rules are still in full force and effect, with the addition that regard must now be had not only to the common .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1970Raj26; 1969()WLN1
..... on 8-2-1960, by giving the defendants benefit of section 13 (4) of the rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950 (which for the sake of brevity will be referred to hereinafter as 'the act').4. aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the senior civil judge, jaipur the plaintiff landlord filed appeal before this court which was ..... not have filed appeals or revisions presumably because the statute did not allow further right of an appeal or revision against such a decree or who did not find force in any further appeal or revision in view of the state of law as it then existed, and who could not prefer appeal or revision after the commencement of ..... 9, rule 13, civil p. c. in support of this observation the learned judges of the orissa high court placed reliance on bhawanipore banking corporationltd. v. gouri shankar, air 1950 sc 6. we may state here that these authorities have also no bearing on the point at issue before us and we, therefore, do not feel inclined to make a .....
Tag this Judgment!