Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1988WLN(UC)204
I.S. Israni, J.1. This Civil Special Appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance read with Order 43, Rule 1, CPC has been filed against judgment of learned Single Judge, dated January 15, 1986, in SB. Civil Miscellaneous Restoration Application No. 61/1986, where by the application filed by the appellants Under Order 41, Rules 19 read with Section 151, CPC for re-admission of hearing of S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 8/1975 was dismissed in default.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants filed first appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Alwar, passed on November 30, 1974, which was dismissed in default of appearance of both parties on February 7, 1985. A restoration application was filed by the appellants, which was dismissed on January 15, 1986. The main ground, along with some other grounds on which the application for restoration was dismissed was that it was time barred by 258 days.3. The contention o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1980WLN248
Miss Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated' 25-2-1972 passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara In the proceedings on, the application filed by Smt. Raksha Bahen, and Shantilal under 'section 110 A of the Motor Vehicles-Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act') for damages to she tune of Rs. 60,000/ on account of the death of one Piyush Kumar Jain (husband of Smt. Raksha, Baben and son of bantilal), who met a fatal accident on 20-4-1968 at 2.45 p.m. on Ajmer-Bhilwara road near the Kothat river As the two appeals arise out of the, same judgment and award, we propose to decide them by one common judgment.2. Briefly stated the, facts of the case giving rise to these appeals are that on 20-4-1968 decessed Piyush Kumar alongwith his wife, petitioner Smt. Raksha Bahen, &his; father Shantilal was travelling from Ajmer to Bhilwara in Bus No. RJE 755 belonging to 'M/s Delux Roadways (P) Ltd., Bhilwara a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2003(1)WLC788; 2003(2)WLN462
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petition is pending before this Court for last two years and still notices have not been issued. The petition is against the order of the learned trial court rejecting an application of the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 of the code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'the Code') filed on the ground that the application filed under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code did not give rise to any cause of action for the reason that the Court had passed the order to maintain status quo regarding possession and it was not possible to identify the land in respect of which the interim order had been passed and, thus, the application under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code should be rejected. The Court has dismissed the application on the ground that whether the land, in respect of which the interim order had been passed, could be identified, is a question to be determined after considering the evidence led by the parties.2. In such a complicated issue as to whether the land, in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1977WLN198
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner entered the service of the Municipal Board, Phalodi in the district of Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') as an Accounts Clerk on April 8, 1954. The date of birth of the petitioner as entered in his service book was August 31, 1919. The petitioner continued to work in the service of the Board as an Upper Division Clerk and subsequently as officiating Executive Officer of the Board. According to the petitioner, an anonymous complaint was made against him before the Sub Divisional Officer, Phalodi on September 13, 1972 on which the aforesaid officer made an inquiry and as a result thereof he came to the conclusion that August 31, 1919 was the correct date of birth of the petitioner and further that there was no reason to doubt the entry made in respect thereof in the service record of the petitioner. A copy of the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Phalodi dated December 3, 1972 rejecting the complaint filed in this respect has been produce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1974CriLJ1230; 1974(7)WLN255
ORDERB.P. Beri, C.J.1. Against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer, dated December 2, 1970 Chhitar and four others have come up in revision before me in a proceeding under Section 133, Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The applicants before me had filed an application against the opposite parties Chhoga and some others under Sectiop 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ajmer. Their grievance was that there is a Budh Sagar Tank bearing No. 118 which is a Government tank in village Bagsuri which served to irrigate nearly 2000 Bighas of land in villages Bagsuri, Laxmipura and Budhpura. The tank accumulated the rain water from the hillocks of Banevara through a natural water course CBala'). The opposite parties of village Banevara raised a mud wall and also constructed a 'pucca' wall in the bed of the 'Bala' with a view to appropriate the rain water. The applicants contended that the said obstruction starved the Budh Sagar Tank which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1975)ILLJ140Raj
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by one Shri Mahavir Prasad Pancholi challenging his fixation in the Municipal Service constituted under the Rajasthan Municipal Service Rules 1963, vide order Ex. 4 dated 15-5-69.2. The petitioner entered service in the Municipal Board, Kota as a Taxation Officer in the grade of Rs. 100-5-150-EB-10-200 on 28.6-51. In 1953, the post of Taxation Officer was re-designated as Revenue Officer. The grade allowed to the petitioner with effect from 1-4-53 was Rs. 120-5-150-15/2-240 vide order of the State Government dated 23-4-57. The Kota Municipal Board was raised to the status of the Municipal Council from 17-10-59 and the petitioner's post was designated as Revenue Officer, Municipal Council, Kota. The question of integration of Revenue Officers in the Municipal Service was taken up. The petitioner submits that on 31-3-60, which is the crucial date for purposes of fixation in the integrated set up, he was holding...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1977WLN521
K.D. Sharma, J.1. This is an appeal filed by Nena Ram and Bhura Ram against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Merta, dated September 5 1974, by which Nena Ram was convicted under Section 304, part II and Section 324. I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months on the first count and on the second to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Both the substantive sentences were however, ordered to run concurrently. By this very judgment, Bhura Ram appellant was convicted under Section 323, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 2. The prosecution case against appellants was as follows: On 14th October, 1973, at about 7.30 p. m. Panna Ram was returning to his house after grazing his cattle in the jungle His son Chhotu Ram was looking after his cattle in his enclosure situated in village Sidla. At that time Panna Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1(1986)ACC17
G.M. Lodha, J.1. These two cross appeals have been filed by the R.S.R.T.C. and Smt. Vidhya Sharma, against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 17-12-1980.2. One Kailash Sharma, now deceased was milk seller. On 3rd September, 1978, at 4.00 a.m. Kailash Sharma, with Suresh and Narendra wanted to go to Jaipur from Village Gidani. They stood in the Katcha' near the road and gave signal to bus No. RSM 961 to stop and pick them up. The bus driver was driving the vehicle rashly and he struck Kailash on account of which he died on the spot. The bus was being driven by Damodar Prasad.3. The defence of the Corporation is that the accident happened due to negligence of Kailash Sharma. Near Gidani, stand 5 and 6 persons were standing. When the bus came nearer they came on road and raised their hands to stop the bus when the bus did not stop then they started running hither and thither and 4 to 5 persons ran away on the left side and one on the right side which was wrong side. Thi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :JUDGMENT: S.B. CIVIL FIRST APPEAL NO.152/2013 Smt. Saroj & Ors. Vs. Prabhu Narain Mathur & Anr. Date of Judgment ::07. h February, 2014 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr. H.R. Soni, for the appellants. Mr. M.D. Boob ) Mr. Mahesh Joshi ), for the respondents. ---- BY THE COURT: REPORTABLE This appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 22.01.2013 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur, whereby, the suit filed by the plaintiffs for partition and permanent injunction has been dismissed and order dated 22.02.2013 passed by said Court, whereby, the judgment dated 22.01.2013 was reviewed and the counter claim filed by the defendant No.1 for possession, which was originally dismissed, has been decreed. The facts in brief may be noticed thus: the appellants- plaintiffs filed a suit, inter alia, with the averments that they are legal representatives of late Kailash Narayan Mathur (K...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :JUDGMENT: S.B.CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.54/2009 LRs of Abdul Majid versus Pukhraj and ORS.Date of Judgment :: 20.01.2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.Sukesh Bhati, for the appellants. Mr.R.R.Nagori, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Alkesh Agarwal, for the respondents. ---- BY THE COURT: This second appeal under Section 100 CPC is directed against judgment and decree dated 23.08.1995 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division).Jodhpur City, Jodhpur ('the trial court') as upheld by the appellate decree dated 16.10.2008 passed by Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.4, Jodhpur ('the appellate court').The facts in brief may be noticed thus: the suit was filed in the year 1974 by Shankar Lal, father the respondents-plaintiffs seeking permanent injunction against Abdul Majid, father of the appellants, inter alia, with the averments that the land in question was sold by the Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur to 2 the plaitniff on 10.04...
Tag this Judgment!