Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Mar-09-1979
Reported in : 1979WLN224
M.C. Jain, J.1. These 26 are writ, petitions where in orders passed by he Sub-Divisional Officer, Sojat, (respondent No. 3) dated 18.9.75 and the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jodhpur (respondent No. 5). dated 26.3.76 in ceiling proceedings in relation to the lands held and transferred by respondent No. 4 in favour of the petitioners, have been sought to be quashed.2. The petitioners have averred in their writ petitions that they are agriculturists domiciled in Rajasthan within the defnition of the term as given in explanation to Section 30DD of Chapter III of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') They are permanently residing In Rajasthan since birth and earn their livelihood wholly from agriculture and cultivate their lands by their own labour and the labour of the members of their family They being landless cultivators as defined in the Act purchased Agricultural lands described in para 2 of the writ petitions not exceeding 30 acres from respondent No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-01-1979
Reported in : 1979WLN144
S.N. Deedwania, J.1. This revision is preferred against the order dated 21.8.1974 of learned Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner, dismissing the petitioner's application for revoking the order of taking cognizance dated 16.7.1973, against him under Section 304A IPC.2. The facts brifly stated are these : that in a case under Section 304A, IPC the police presented a final report before the Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner. The learned Magistrate dis-agreeing with the opinion of the SHO took cognizance of the offence under Section 304A, IPC, against the accused petitioner, on 16.7.1963 who, thereafter, presented an application that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of offence under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the new code) and therefore, the order should be revoked The learned Magistrate rejected this application of the accused petiiior.fr while holding that even under the new Code, he has the power rand jurisdiction to take cognizance of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-05-1979
Reported in : 1979WLN(UC)10
M.C. Jain, J.1. This is a civil second appeal by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment and decree dated 6-9-1967 passed by the Civil Judge, Sojat, upholding the judgment and decree dated 31-7-1965 passed by the Munsif, Jaitaran, whereby the State of Rajasthan was restrained from effecting recovery of Rs. 990.72P. from the plaintiffs Ganesh Mal and Sohanlal.2. The plaintiffs' case, in brief, was that the plaintiffs were appointed agents for the storage and sales of food grains by the then Jodhpur Government under an agreement Ex. 1. The Government supplied 1540 'maunds wheat & 1,116 'maunds Gujji of the value of Rs. 31, 269/5/4. The plaintiffs were to be paid commission @ Rs. 1/10/- per maund. The Plaintiffs after deducting their commission amounting to Rs. 4, 316/- deposited the price of grain amounting to Rs. 26,953/5/4 in the Treasury through challans in two installments. When the commission bill was insisted by the Government, there was found a total shortage of Maunds 61.0 5 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-10-1979
Reported in : AIR1979Raj164; 1979()WLN127
M.L. Joshi, Actg. C.J.1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, dated October, 12 1976, whereby he dismissed the writ petition challenging the conversion of the Gram Panchayat, Ahore, into Municipality, Ahore.2. The appellant filed a writ petition wherein he challenged the validity of notification (Ex. 1) dated April 16, 1975, issued under Section 6 of the Rajas-than Municipalities Act, 1959 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act of 1959) and the notification (Ex. 6) issued under Section 6 (1) of the Act of 1959 on January 28, 1976 (Ex. 6). He also prayed for quashing of the proceedings coming from the notification dated April 16, 1975 and culminating in the notification dated January 28, 1976. It was further prayed in the writ petition that the Municipal Board, Ahore, be directed to forebear from functioning as a Municipal Board under the provisions of the Act and that the Land and Bui...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-10-1979
Reported in : 1979WLN(UC)19
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated, 19th December, 1975 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pali in Ceiling Case No. 334 of 1975 and the order dated 31st March, 1976, passed by the Addl. Collector, Pali in Ceiling Appeal, No. 46 of 1976: The facts related to the filing of the writ petition are briefly, as under:2. The petitioners are the daughters of the Rama Kishan and respondents Nos. 4 and 5 are the sons of the said Rama Kishan, whereas respondent No. 6 is the wife of Rama Kishan, Rama Kishan died on 18th September, 1959. At the time of his death 36 bighas and- 19 biswas of land in Khasra No. 85 was entered in the revenue records in the name of Rama Kishan and 550 bighas of land in Khasara Nos. 74,81, 86 87 add 89 were entered in the names of his sons. Pukhraj and Anandraj, respondents Nos. 4 and 5. The case of the petitioners is th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-11-1979
Reported in : 1979WLN(UC)14
M.C. Jain, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 11-1-1972 of the District Judge, Bikaner, upholding the order of the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, Bikaner Division, Bikaner, dated 14- 5-1971 whereby it held that it has no jurisdiction to try claim applications presented by the present petitioner on the ground that the Payment of Wages Act has not been made applicable to Durgargath under the Notification dated 31st August, 1965.2. The present petitioner was appointed by the former State Bank of Bikaner and was serving at Dungargarh at the relevant time. He was placed under suspension on 18th April, 1968, on the grounds of misbehaviour with the Branch Agent and after enquiry he was removed from service. The present petitioner submitted claim application for his wages, which were registered as claim cases Nos. 227, 228, 229, 283, 284 of 1968; 54 and 71 of 1970; and 23, 24, 25 and 26 of 1971. The details of these claims have been mentioned by the Dist...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-12-1979
Reported in : AIR1979Raj87; 1979()WLN37
M.C. Jain, J.1. The following question of law was referred by one of us (M. C. Jain, J.) to be answered by the Full Bench vide order of reference dated 2-9-1978:--'Whether the finding recorded by the first appellate court on the issue relating to comparative hardship remitted by this Court, being a finding of fact, is not open to challenge in the second appeal?'2. The material facts leading to the present reference may be briefly stated as follows:--3. Mahant Ramdas, plaintiff-respondent, instituted a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment from the disputed premises on the ground of personal necessity and default in the Court of Munsif, Udaipur, who by his judgment dated 30-11-1966 decreed the suit for eviction having found issue No. 2 regarding personal necessity in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant went in appeal, but his appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, vide his judgment dated 10th of July, 1968. The defendant then preferred the second appeal. Duri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-16-1979
Reported in : 1979WLN151
M.L. Joshi, Actg. C.J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order passed by the leaned Sessions Judge, Udaipur, dated January 21, 1976, whereby be upheld the order of the learned Executive Magistrate, Udaipur, dated October 23, 1975, who permitted the continuance of the proceedings under Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'), even after the expiry of fix months from the date of the commencement of the proceedings.2. A complaint was filed by the police under Section 110 of the Act against the accused-petitioner in the court of the City Magistrate, Udaipur on March 6, 1975. That complaint subsequently came to be transferred to the court of the Executive Magistrate, Udaipur. The same was registered by the learned City Magistrate, Udaipur, woo issued summonses to the accused-petitioner for his appearance in his Court on March 22, 1975. The summonses for hearing on March 22, 1975, were taken to be served on the ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-22-1979
Reported in : AIR1979Raj148; 1979()WLN51
M.C. Jain, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 5-10-1967 of the District Judge, Balotra, whereby he decreed the plaintiffs' suit in toto.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated as under:The plaintiff-respondents instituted a suit against the three defendants Bastiram, and his two sons Bhanwara and Ghewarchand with the allegations that the defendant No. 1 Basti Ram executed a pronote and a receipt in favour of the plaintiffs on Phalgun Sudi 8, 2019 corresponding to 3-3-1963 for a sum of Rs. 2,101/- after acknowledging the balance of past loan and stipulated to pay interest @ 12% per annum. The plaintiffs sued for Rs. 2,101/- as principal and Rs. 749/- on account of interest, total Rs. 2,850/-.3. It may be stated that the suit against Bhanwara and Ghewarchand stands dismissed and it is only defendant No. 1 Bastiram, who is at present contesting. Bastiram submitted his written statement in which he admitted the execution of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-29-1979
Reported in : 1980CriLJ779
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. Against the judgment of acquittal dated July 14, 1977 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara, the State of Rajasthan has preferred this appeal for securing the conviction of the accused-respondent under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (No. XXXVII of 1954) (for short 'the Act' hereafter).2. The Food Inspector, Municipal Area, Bhilwara filed a complaint on August 31, 1970 against the accused under Section 16(1) of the Act. According to the prosecution, the accused was carrying on his business in a shop situate inside Sarkari Darwaja, Sadar Bazar, Bhilwara under the name and style of swastik Masala Bhandar. On June 8, 1970, at 5 p. m., the Food Inspector Sardarsingh went there and purchased 450 grams chillies powder from the accused at a price of Rs. 2.70. The accused was duly informed vide Ex. P1 (Form No. VI) that the chillies powder was being purchased for the purpose of getting it analysed. The chillies powder, purchased from the...
Tag this Judgment!