Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: rajasthan Year: 1966 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.029 seconds)

Nov 23 1966 (HC)

Singhal Transport Vs. Jesaram Jamumal

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-23-1966

Reported in : AIR1968Raj89

..... the passage-ticket. garth c. j. delivering the judgment of the court observed--'although he may not understand french, he was a man of business contracting with a french company, whose tickets he knew very well were written in the french language. he had ample time and means to get the ticket ..... it was further held that the fact that the plaintiff could not read did not alter the legal position; that she was bound by the special contract made on the excursion ticket on the acceptance of the ticket; and that the indication of the special conditions by reference to the time tables was ..... receiving a ticket in such a way that he could see that some writing was printed on it, would understand that the writing contained the conditions of contract, and this seems to me to depend upon whether people in general would in fact, and naturally draw that inference. the railway company, as it ..... seems to me to be that in the great majority of cases persons shipping goods do know that the bill of lading contains the terms of the contract of carriage; and the shipowner, or the master delivering the bill of lading is entitled to assume that the person shipping goods has that knowledge. it ..... absence of fraud, immaterial that the defendant had not read the agreement and did not know its contents. now if in the course of making a contract one party delivers to another a paper containing writing and the party receiving the paper knows that the paper contains conditions which the party delivering it intends .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 02 1966 (HC)

State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Raghuraj Singh

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-02-1966

Reported in : AIR1968Raj14

modi, j.1. these two civil appeals arise out of a single judgment and decree of the civil judge, bun'di, dated 14th october. 1958, in a suit for refund of money and we propose to dispose of them together by present judgment.2. the material facts may shortly be stated as follows :--3. the plaintiff was the ex-jagirdar of thikana koila in the former state of kola it is admitted that his jagir was resumed by the state on the 1st august, 1954. under the rajas-than land reforms and resumption of jagirs act, 1952. the state of kota. as it then was, was merged in what may conveniently be called the first united state of rajasthan in april, 1948, and became part of the second united state of rajasthan which was formed in the middle of 1949 the last mentioned state was then formed into the part b state of rajasthan with the coming into force of the constitution on 26th january. 1950. and is now represented by the present state of rajasthan as it was constituted under the states reorganisation act. 1956 (act no xxxi of 1956). it is further common ground between the parties that the first united state of raias-than issued ordinances no 27 of 1948 and nos. 10 and 15 of 1949, by which the manage ment of all jagirs existing in that state inclu-ding the jagir of the present appellant was taken over by the then state by virtue of the provisions of those ordinances.the position, therefore was that when the second united state of rajasthan was formed in may, 1949. these ordinances were in .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1966 (HC)

Khan Mohamed and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-06-1966

Reported in : AIR1967Raj37

..... to the state government and to the forest authorities for the renewal of this agreement, but it is not disputed by the parties that the government refused to renew the contract of the plaintiffs. the plaintiffs exhausted the remedy of filing an appeal before the chief conservator of forests and making the representation before the government. the appeal of the plaintiff ..... the forest and manufacture 'katha' from it and, therefore, he may be directed to withdraw the amount of rs. 561 deposited as 10 per cent money over and above the contract. the plaintiff thereupon filed an appeal to the chief conservator of forests who by his order dated 1st of february, 1960, dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff. then a representation ..... per cent for the remaining 374 handis, that is rs. 561 and then to permit him to work the forest to complete the manufacture of 500 handis for which the contract was given to him by the department. thereupon, the statement of khan mohammad was recorded on 28th of september, 1948, wherein he admitted that an amount of rs. 2,000 ..... necessary for the plaintiff to make an application by february 1948.according to the allegation, made by him in his plaint, the plaintiff made an application for renewal of the contract in the month of april, 1948 but the copy of that application has not been placed on record. upto june, 1948, the plaintiff could prepare only 126 handis. he made .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1966 (HC)

Gopi Shanker and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-21-1966

Reported in : AIR1967Raj159; 1967CriLJ922

l.n. chhangani, j.1. these seven appeals are directed against the judgment and order of the additional sessions judge no. 1, jodhpur, dated 23rd of december, 1965. in sessions case no. 16 of 1965/31 of 1965 the additional sessions judge tried the seven appellants for offences under sections 376, 342 and 323, indian penal code. after trial, he found them all guilty and convicted them and awarded sentences as detailed below :-- gopi shankeru/s 376, p.o. 5 years r. i. & fine of rs. 500/-; in default, one year's r.i. u/ss 342 |6 months r.i. &fine; of rs. 50/-; in default, two month r. i. on each count.323 | r/w 34 | mahesh chand u/s 376 5 years r.i. &fine; of rs. 100/-; in default, six months r.i.shiv kumar | dhan singh | sher singh | tulsi ram | u/ss 342 | 6 months r i. &fine; of r. 50/-; in default, two months r. i. on each count.ram chander | 323| r/w 34 || all the sentences to ran concurrently. 2. each of the seven convicts has filed a separate appeal challenging his convictions and sentences and these seven appeals are being disposed of together.3. the facts on which the prosecution is founded may be briefly stated as follows:-- mst draupdi--the prosecutrix pw/1 was married with arjun pw/2 in or about the year 1982 in jodhpur. mst. draupdi's parents resided during the relevant period in a house in mohalla navchowki, jodhpur, whereas, her husband resided at mahamandir. two months before the incident which occurred in the night between 3rd and 4th of june, 1965, and which has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1966 (HC)

Satyanarayan S. Mody Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, New Delhi.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-11-1966

Reported in : [1967]65ITR84(Raj)

..... of the property taken under the gift but also thenceforward retained it to the entire exclusion of the donor or any benefit to him by contract or otherwise. if the donor has not been entirely excluded, then it is not at all relevant to consider whether the non-exclusion of ..... possession and enjoyment of the gifted property or from any benefit by contract or otherwise.it is clear from the narration of facts given above that the donor was in possession and enjoyment of the entire amount of ..... of the matter. the condition has two limbs : the deceased must be entirely exclude, (i) from the property, and (ii) from any benefit by contract of otherwise.'we will now see in the light of the above analysis whether the deceased was, either from the outset or subsequently, entirely, excluded from the ..... given), and from the possession and enjoyment thereof (other than occupation of possession of land or chattels for full consideration), and also from any benefit by contract or otherwise (and also, as respects settled property, had no power of revocation or right to reclaim the absolute interest in the property : see p ..... assumed by the donee immediately upon the gift and thenceforward retained to the entire exclusion of the donor, or of any benefit to him by contract or otherwise.'it would appear that the provision there was analogous to section 10 reproduced above. referring to the above provision, hamilton j. observed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 1966 (HC)

Thakur Hari Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi and Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-07-1966

Reported in : AIR1968Raj5; [1967]65ITR267(Raj)

kan singh, j. 1. we have before us a reference by the income-tax appellate tribunal bombay bench 'b' under section 66(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and the following three questions have been referred to us with the statement of the case :--'(1) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the proper status to be taken in the income-tax assessment on the assessee is individual or hindu undivided family ? (2) whether on the facts here, with reference to the house properties, income from which are assessed here, section 9(4) of the income-tax act, 1922, was properly applied? (3) whether the custom of impartibility is invalid on the ground of its being discriminatory so as to offend article 14 of the constitution of india?' 2. both the learned counsel, for the assessee and the department, however, agreed that the fate of the case turns on the determination of the first question and accordingly they addressed us only on that question. they also agreed that the other two questions really did not arise in the case.3. the assessment years in question to which the reference relates are 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61. the relevant previous years are the financial years preceding the three assessment years. the tribunal has narrated the facts with reference to the assessment year 1958-59, which was typical of the three assessment years. the assessee was thakur hari singh who was formerly the jagirdar of haria-dhana in tehsil bilara, district jodhpur. the income of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 1966 (HC)

Mahavir Chand and anr. Vs. Budhmal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-20-1966

Reported in : AIR1967Raj251

..... case, it will be sufficient to refer to a subsequent case of the same high court. in karalia nanuhhai mahomedbhai v. mansukhram vakhatchand, (1900) ilr 24 born 400 under a contract of sale with respect to certain fields, possession was delivered to the vendee, and the whole of the purchase-money was paid to the vendor, but the transfer was not ..... decisions were referred to. the learned counsel for the appellants, however, relied upon hormasji manekji dadachanji v. keshav purshotam, (1894) ilr 18 bom 13 wherein it was held that a contract for the sale of immoveable property reciting the receipt of earnest money and providing for the execution of a proper conveyance within two months was held not to pass any ..... properly in the sense in which the expression 'interest' is used in the last paragraph of section 54, transfer of property act. the existence of a valid and pre-existing contract in favour of the claimant for the sale of the property brought under attachment clothes him with sufficient right and interest to enable him to intervene in execution with a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 1966 (HC)

KutbuddIn and ors. Vs. the State

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-20-1966

Reported in : AIR1967Raj224

orderb.p. beri, j.1. this is an application under section 561-a of the code of criminal procedure wherein it is prayed that the proceedings against the applicants under sections 3 and 9 of the official secrets act, 1923 (act xix of 1923) (hereinafter called 'the act'), and rules 39 and 41 of the defence of india rules and section 120b of the indian penal code be declared illegal and quashed.2. the circumstances which it is necessary to notice for the disposal of this application are these:3. on 18th september, 1965 shri s.n. bhargava, superintendent of police, security, rajasthan, jaipur lodged a first information report with the ramganj police station, jaipur mat kutbuddin, abdul aziz, usman, and razaullah of jaipur had given and wore giving information to pakistan which was prejudicial to the safety of india, and, therefore, a case under sections 3 and 9 of the act and rules 39 and 41 of the defence of india rules came to be registered. mr. ojha, deputy superintendent of police was appointed to investigate the offences. he searched the houses of these four persons. nothing incriminating is said to have been found. all the four accused persons were arrested on 18th september, 1965.the magistrate remanded them to police custody until 4th october, 1965 under section 167 of the code of criminal procedure. they were presented before the city magistrate, jaipur on 4th october, 1965 and they were further remanded to custody. on 14th october, 1965 one samsamul haq arshi of jodhpur .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 01 1966 (HC)

Smt. Kanchan Vs. Babu Bhai and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-01-1966

Reported in : AIR1967Raj184

..... appeal to the privy council.the appeal was dismissed with the following observations:--'their lordships are of opinion that the decision is correct. if the debt in question was not contracted for purposes regarded as immoral by the hindu law, and if the respondents being grandsons of badri singh were liable therefor to the extent of their interest in the joint ..... a proper debt payable by the sons. but even if the sons are not made parties, they cannot resist the sale unless they succeed in establishing that the debts were contracted for immoral purposes. these propositions can be said to be well recognised and reasonably beyond the region of controversy, vide girdharee lall v. kantoo lall, (1873-74) 1 ind app .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //