Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-07-1971
Reported in : 1971WLN23
Kan Singh, J.1. Accused Mangal Singh and Sahab Singh were convicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge No. 1, Dholpur of offences under Sections 326 and 326 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code respectively Each one of them was awarded a sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 250/-; in default six months' further rigorous imprisonment. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge further ordered that at amount of Rs. 250/- out of the fine, if realised, shall be paid to injured Gordhana. The accused lodged an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge Bharatpur which was transferred to the learned Additional Sessions Judge Dholpur who had dismissed it and maintained the conviction and the sentence awarded to the accused petitioners. They have come up to this Cour in revision.2. There was bad blood between P.W. 1 Gordhana and the two accused on account of a dispute about an agricultural land. Mangal Singh was the son aged about 14 years at the time and Sahab Singh was his...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Dec-20-1971
Reported in : AIR1972Raj209; 1971(4)WLN660
ORDERV.P. Tyagi, J.1. Since common questions of law are involved in all these three writ petitions filed by the manufacturers of salt at Didwana and Pachpadra Salt Sources, I propose to dispose them of by one judgment.2. Writ Petition No. 218 of 1969 and No. 1683 of 1970 are the petitions of the manufacturers of salt coming from Didwana who are known as Deshwals while Petition No. 1373 of 1969 is the petition from the manufacturer of salt at Pachpadra known as Kharwal.3. The history of Kharwals and Deshwals is about three to four hundred years old. For the purpose of this judgment, it will be relevant to mention that the Deshwals who are generally Mohammedans by caste are the residents of Didwana. Their main occupation is to manufacture salt from the pans granted to them by His Highness the Maharaja of Jodhpur. These salt pans are also known in that area as salt factories. In these factories Deshwals claim Bapi rights which are both heritable and transferable. The petitioners in Writ P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Dec-10-1971
Reported in : 1971WLN593
B.P. Beri, J.1. This is an application by 7 accused persons, who have been committed by the Munsiff Magistrate, Desuri. for facing their trial under Sections 120B, 307, 392, 398, 458, 324, 148 and 149 I.P.C. in the Court of the Additions Sessions Judge, Sirohi. The grounds for the transfer urged before me are that it will be convenient for the defence to engage eminent lawyers from Jodhpur for defending the accused at Pali and also because the learned Munsiff Magistrate could not commit the case directly to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi, in view of the provisions of Sections 9 and 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. It will be proper to first dispose of the legal question raised before me. Mr. Bhimraj, learned Counsel for the applicants, argued that under the Criminal Procedure Code there is only one Sessions court in one Sessions division, who takes cognizance of sessions cases on commitment, and an Additional Sessions Judge only works as a Sessions Judge when any...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Dec-06-1971
Reported in : AIR1972Raj191
Kan Singh, J.1. The two appeals before me arise out of the judgment and decree of the learned Senior Civil Judge No. 1, Jodhpur in a suit under Order 21, Rule 103, Civil Procedure Code.2. Plaintiff Hastimal and others were the sons of late Shri Mukanchand Balia. Eao Raja Panney Singh had mortgaged one 'Haveli' known as Haveli of Thikana Sanwrad situated at Jodhpur and fully described in para 4 of the plaint, as also some other property for Rs. 28,000/-with Shri Mukanchand Balia by a registered mortgage deed on 14-9-1943. On 21-1-1946, Rao Rafa Panney Singh took a fresh loan of Rs. 7,000/- and executed a second mortgage in favour of Shri Mukanchand. According to the plaintiffs, this Haveli belonged to Rao Raja Panney Singh and for it he had a patta dated 9-7-1934 in his name as also in the names of his sons Rao Raja Ranveer Singh, Rao Raja Chain Singh, Rao Raja Sukh Singh and Rao Raja Tej Singh, the defendants in the case.Shri Mukanchand obtained a decree for the sale of the mortgaged p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-30-1971
Reported in : [1973]89ITR96(Raj)
Jagat Narayan, C.J. 1. On an application by the accountable persons under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has referred the following question of law to this court; ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire property held by the deceased was correctly included in his estate as property passing or deemed to pass on his death for purposes of estate duty ' 2. The facts giving rise to the reference are these Budhmal Dugar, the deceased person, along with his brother, Sumermal Dugar, constituted a Hindu undivided family hiving ancestral properties. There was a partition between the brothers in 1938 and the deceased received his share of the family properties. He died on March 17, 1954, leaving his widow, Smt. Dhani Devi, who adopted Jhavermal to her husband 11 days after his death. Smt. Dhani Bai and Jhavermal filed a return under the Estate Duty Act in which they claimed that the deceased constituted a Hindu undivid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-22-1971
Reported in : AIR1972Raj145
ORDERV.P. Tyagi, J. 1. Messrs. Brimco Bricks, Bharatpnr, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The main business of this firm is to manufacture bricks from brick earth. It is said that the petitioner firm has agricultural lands in its Khatedari bearing Khasra Nos. 891, 802, 893 and 907 to 916 in the town of Bharatpur. Since 1958 this firm is manufacturing bricks and the brick earth is taken out from its agricultural fields. According to the petitioner's contention, the Government of Rajasthan in the beginning used to collect royalty on the brick manufactured by the petitioner firm through one Hardwarilal Thekedar, but this practice was given up by the Mining Department after 1965 and thereafter the Department itself started raising demands for the payment of royalty from the petitioner. From the correspondence exchanged between the petitioner firm and the department, it transpires that the petitioner firm was prepared to pay the royalty but it objected to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-10-1971
Reported in : AIR1972Raj74
Kan Singh, J. 1. I have before me two appeals concerning the validity of an election to the Municipal Council of Bikaner held on 25-10-70 from Ward No. 31. 2. The counting of votes took place on 26-10-1970. In all 1441 votes were cast. Out of them 139 votes had been rejected by the Returning Officer; some were rejected because there were more than one seal impressions and others were rejected as there were other ink marks on them, or for the reason that the ballot papers had no seal marks altogether. Shri Vasudeo was found to have secured 524 valid votes, while Shri Ramkishan was found to have secured 493 valid votes. Accordingly. Shri Vasudeo was declared elected. 3. In November. 1970 Shri Ramkishan filed an election petition challenging the election of Shri Vasudeo before the Dist. Judge of Bikaner who subsequently transferred it to the Senior Civil Judge at Bikaner. The two-fold prayer was made in the election petition. In the first instance, it was pray-ed that the election of Shri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-10-1971
Reported in : 1971WLN510
Kan Singh, J.1. I have before me two appeals concerning the validity of an election to the Municipal Council of Bikaner held on 25-10-70 from Ward No. 31.2. The counting of votes took place on 26-10-70. In all 1441 votes were cast Out of them 139 votes had been rejected by the Returning Officer; some were rejected because there were more than one seal impressions and others were rejected as there were other ink marks on them, or for the reason that the ballot papers had no seal marks altogether. Shri Vasudeo was found to have secured 524 valid votes, while Shri Ramkishan was found to have secured 493 valid votes. Accordingly, Shri Vasudeo was declared elected.3. In November, 1970 Shri Ramkishan filed an election petition challenging the election of Shri Vasudeo before the District Judge of Bikaner who subsequently transferred it to the Senior Civil Judge at Bikaner. The twofold prayer was made in the election petition. In the first instance, it was prayed that the election of Shri Vasu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-07-1971
Reported in : 1971WLN616
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. Petitioner Makanchand has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that by issuing an appropriate writ order or direction the order of the Government dated 21st March, 1970, canceling the sanction accorded on 19th January, 1970, to prosecute the respondents Nos. 4 and 5, be quashed.2. This writ petition raises an important question of law whether State Government is competent to withdraw the sanction once accorded by it under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to prosecute a public servant.3. The facts giving rise to this petition in a nut shell are as follows.4. Respondent No. 4 Shri Bahadurisingh was the Sarpanch of village Ranideshipura, while respondent No. 5 Magna was the Panch of that Panchayat A notice was issued by the Gram Panchayat, Ranideshipura to the petitioner along with 8 other residents of that village directing them to remove the unauthorised construction of Chabutaries within a period of seven days from the dat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-01-1971
Reported in : 1971WLN467
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. As the learned Counsel for the petitioners have not pressed some of the facts or grounds on which petitioners K.K. Bhatia and S.C., Sachdev have filed these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, it will be sufficient to refer to those facts and grounds which have figured in the controversy before roe.2. The petitioners were appointed as Assistant Engineers under a Survey and Investigation Scheme of the Rajasthan Ground water Board, by an order of the State Government dated January 16, 1967. The appointments were ad hoc and temporary & the petitioners took over as Assistant Engineers on March 13, 1967. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission, respondent No. 1, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' The petitioners applied for those posts and appeared for interview before the Commission, They were however not selected and intimation Ex. I dated February 29, 1971 was. sent to them to those effect by the Secretariat of the Commission. The Commission sele...
Tag this Judgment!