Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 1970 Page 1 of about 21 results (0.010 seconds)

Dec 04 1970 (HC)

Ratan Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-04-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN819

..... it has acquired the meaning of the place where justice is administered and, further, has come to mean the persons who exercase judicial functions under authority derived either immediately or mediately from the severeign. all tribunals, however, are not courts in the sense in which the term is employed, namely, to denote such tribunals as exercise jurisdiction ever persons by reason .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 08 1970 (HC)

Likhmi Chand and ors. Vs. Smt. Sukhdevi and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-08-1970

Reported in : AIR1970Raj285; 1970(3)WLN225

..... adopted the plaintiff some time after her husband's death early in 1935. shortly thereafter, there were some disputes between the plaintiff and challamma which were ultimately referred to some mediators for settlement. ultimately it ended in settlement evidenced by ex. a-8 by and under which she was given four acres of wet land and one acre of dry land .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1970 (HC)

Smt. Chandra Mani Vs. Gopi Vallabh and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-18-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN313

p.n. shinghal, j. 1. this appeal by defendant smt. chandra mani against the appellate judgment of district judge, jodhpur, dated april 30, 1962, decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs-respondents for possession of the suit house and declaring the 'patta' and the gift-deed as inoperative.2. the house in question admittedly belonged to roopram. the plaintiff's therefore traced the genealogy from him in order to show that while they were the descendants of shivrup, prabhushanker was the descendent of shambhuram, prabushanker used to reside in the suit house when he died issueless on jeth sud 7, section 2000. the plaintiffs claimed to be his only heirs. mangilal, who was the sole defendant in the suit (as instituted on november 8, 1948) used to reside in the house from the life-time of prabhushanker. the plaintiffs asked him to vacate the house, but he refused to do so inspite of notice, on the plea that it had been gifted to him by prabhushanker by gift-deed ex. a. 3 dated may 21, 1938 and he had obtained a 'patta' on that basis. the plaintiffs however challenged the gift-deed as illegal and void on the grounds that it was made for valuable consideration and was a grant, in charity, from the rule so that it was inalienable,3. defendant mangilal denied the claim altogether, except that he admitted the genealogical table showing the relationship of mangilal and prabhushanker. he pleaded that the suit house fell to the share of prabhushanker and was in his possession. he denied that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1970 (HC)

Nandlal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-30-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN90

l.s. mehta, j.1. the plaintiff nandlal filed a suit in the court of senior civil judge, udaipur, in forma pauperis against (1) the state of rajasthan, (2) shri jainarain vyas, its ex-chief minister, and its two other ex-ministers (3) shri tikaram paliwal and (4) shri ram karan joshi, for the recovery of rs. 1.25;000/-, as general damages and rs. 500/-, as special damages for malicious prosecution.2. the material facts of the plaintiff's case are that he was appointed as an adviser to the former state of rajasthan, with its capital at udaipur, in august 1948, on an honorarium of rs. 1200/- p.m., and an allowance of rs. 30/-, per diem. the plaintiff prepared several schemes for the development of agriculture, forest, industries, secondary education etc. his plan for the advancement of agriculture was approved by the then government and steps were taken for its implementation. as his varied activities made him popular, some high officers of the state having become jealous wanted to get rid of him. accordingly when he had gone on leave to khamgaon (bombay) on october 22, 1948, the chief secretary of the former state of rajasthan intimated to him through a telegram on november 1, 1948, that his services were terminated despite such an intimation, he joined his duties on november 6,1948 on november 17, 1948, shri sobhagmal talesra, acting director of agriculture, former state of rajasthan, tried to assume charge of his office, but owing to the intervention of the state ministry, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 14 1970 (HC)

Mohan Lal Daga Vs. the State of Raj. and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-14-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN215

jagat narain, c.j.1. this is a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india by one mohanlal daga in which the constitutionality of section 104 of the rajasthan municipalities act, 1959, has been challenged. the petition has been referred for decision by a learned single judge to the division bench. section 104 runs as follows:104. obligatory taxes--every board shall levy, at such rate and from such date as the state government may in each case direct by notification in the official gaeztte and in such manner as is laid down in this act and as may be provided in the rules made by the state government in this behalf, the following taxes, namely:(1) a tax on the annual letting value of buildings or lands or both, situated within the municipality:(2) an octroi on goods and animals brought within the limits of the municipality for consumption, use or sale therein; and(3) a tax on professions and vocations: provided that--(a) the tax under clause (i) shall not be levied--(i) on kham houses, or(ii) on buildings or lands or both, of which annual letting value is less than one hundred and eighty rupees.(b) the tax under clause (2) shall not be on a motor vehicle as defined in the motor vehicles act, 1939 (central act iv of 1939) or any other mechanically propelled vehicle, and;(c) the tax under clause (3) shall not be levied on artisans:provided further that, upon a representation made to it by, and at the request of a board, the state government, if it is satisfied .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 16 1970 (HC)

Vijay Bahadur Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-16-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN671

b.p. beri, j.1. by this judgement dated the 13th april, 1968, the learned additional sessions judge, dholpur has convicted vijai bahadur, editor of 'bedharak', for the murder of surajbhan, editor of 'lal nishan', and sentenced him to a term of imprisonment for life and further to two years rigorous imprisonment for possesssing an unlicensed revolver. aggrieved by that judgment. vijai bahadur appeals and the state prays for the enhancement of his sentence of life imprisonment to one of death.2. in the town of bharatpur two news papers 'lal nishan' and 'bedharak' were edited by surajbhan and vijai bahadur respectively. the relations between these editors were clearly inimical and through the medium of these papers they expressed their deep hostility against one another in unmistakable, if also in equally unedifying, language.3. on 25-4-1966 between 8-30 and 9 p. m. surajbhan was walking in loha bazar, bharatpur, and when he was near the shop of kishanlal, he was riddled with six revolver, shots in quick succession by vijai bahadur and died on the spot. reports from these gun shots attracted the shopkeepers one of them badri prasad saw a man resembling vijai bahadur running, another mangilal saw him near suraj bhan with a pistol in his hand and thereafter running. vijai bahadur while running collided against a boy in the lane and then disappeared. latter in the night at about 11 p. m. vijai bahadur went to an advocate's house presumably to consult him. surajbhan and bharatpur's .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1970 (HC)

Laxmi NaraIn and ors. Vs. Firm Ram Kumar Suraj Bux and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-22-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Raj30; 1970(3)WLN372

jagat narayan, c.j.1. these three appeals arise out of a suit filed under section 73(2), civil p. c. by firm ram kumar suraj bux, against laxmi narain,, smt. surya kumari and the legal representatives of samar singh which was decreed in part by the senior civil judge no. 1, jaipur city.2. the plaintiff firm ram kumar suraj bux as well as samar singh, smt. surya kumari and laxmi narain, defendants obtained decrees against one shiv behari tewari from different courts and put them into execution. the amounts of the decrees at the time of execution were as follows:--courtamountof decree1.plaintiffsenior civil judge, jaipur1,68,033.002.samar singhdistrict judge, bhilwara38,667.623.laxmi narainsenior civil judge, jaipur1,79,009.004.smt. surya kumaricivil judge, shahpura (bhilwara)8,520.003. shiv behari tewari worked as a contractor in the irrigation department. payment of rs. 57,509/- was to be made to him by the executive engineer (irrigation), kankroli. kankroli is situated within the jurisdiction of district judge, udaipur. this payment was 'sanctioned by the chief engineer on 26th march, 1958. the decree-holders got prohibitory orders served on the executive engineer kankroli in respect of this payment under order 21, rule 52, civil p. c, as mentioned below:--decree-holdercourtserving the orderamount ordereddate ofservicesmt. surya kumaricivil judge, shahpura8,508-11-015-1057samar singhdistrict judge, bhilwara10,000/-25-10-57 15000/-10-12-57laxmi narainsenior civil judge, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1970 (HC)

Central Bank of India Vs. Govind Narain

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-21-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Raj306; 1970(3)WLN758

chhangani, j. 1. these four appeals arise out of two suits between the same parties, the earlier being a suit for mere arrears of rent and the later being a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment in respect of the same premises and are connected with each other and deserve to be disposed of by one judgment.2. the material facts may be stated as follows :--in the city of jodhpur outside the jalorigate there is a building known by the name of 'tapariya mansion'. it belonged to shri jai narayan tapariya and his family. in march 1944 a portion of this building was let out by deceased jai narayan to jodhpur commercial bank (hereinafter referred to as the 'bank') at a monthly rent of rs 150/- per month for a period of five years ending on 31st march, 1949. although the initial period of the lease expired on 31st march, 1949, the bank continued to remain in possession of the premises. negotiations were commenced between jai narayan tapariya and the authorities of the bank for the terms of the lease after 31st march, 1949. there was a protracted correspondence and eventually, on 28th october, 1949. jai narayan had a meeting with the chairman and the general manager of the bank at bombay. during that meeting the terms relating to continuance of the lease were discussed and an oral agreement was reached. the main terms agreed were subsequently incorporated in a letter no. 5/f-10-52-731 dated 29-10-1949 addressed by manager, bombay branch, to jai narayan tapariya. they may be reproduced .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 1970 (HC)

Chand Mal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-16-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN658

l.s. mehta, j.1. the prosecution story succinctly put is that smt. nazar bai mother of shankerlal, p.w. 11, had become widow more than 42 year ago. she was residing separetely from her son in the town of chittor. on october 24, 1964, 'karan-chowth' festival occurred. on that occasion mst. nazar bai was invited to dinner by her cousin brother ramchandra, p.w. 23 ramchandra s daughter, aged 10 years, approached her that day at about 4.30 p.m. and extended invitation to her. nazar bai save her 2 paise as a taken of her love and told her that she would certainly visit her house at that time the accused chandmal was present there. sometime later nazir bai left her house to go to ramchandra's place. she was followed by ghandmal nazar bai, it appears, was done to death on her host's residence. as she was living separately from her son, none bothered for her for about a week. when rumour took currency that nazar, bai was missing, her son shankerlal, p.w. 11, lodged a report (ex p 1) with the police station chittor, on oct. 31, 1964, at 10.30 p.m. stating therein that nazar bai was pot traceable. a search was made for her but with no result. ultimately the station house officer. lal singh p.w. 32, recorded a formal report (ex. p. 27), dated december 2, 1964, suspecting that nazar bai with the mtention to cause her death, had been abducted in order to deprive her of her ornaments and other movables. the report ex. p 27 was submitted to the superintendent of police, chittorgarh, who .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 26 1970 (HC)

Mahipal Maderna and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-26-1970

Reported in : 1971CriLJ1405; 1970(3)WLN556

orderp.n. shinghal, j.1. this a reference by sessions judge, jaipur city, dated april 30, 1970, for quashing the order of special magistrate, jaipur, dated april 6, 1970. in order to appreciate the controversy, it is necessary to state some of the facts bearing on it.2. one dilip singh is alleged to have been beaten in room no. 42 of vivekanand hostel, in jaipur, on february 3. 1970, at about 2.30 p.m. the first information report of the incident was lodged the same day at police station gandhinagar, and a case was registered for offences under sections 307 and 452 read with section 149, and section 148, ipc the room was inspected by the investigating officer on february 4, 1970, in the presence of 'motbirs', and some hair were found on and under the bed of dilip singh and on the wall. they were taken in police custody under a memorandum (b/76) for purposes of comparison. dilip singh succumbed to his injuries on february 14, 1970. the investigation of the case was then made over to the central bureau of investigation, government of india, and the case was altered to one for offences under sections 148, 302, 307, 453 read with section 149 and section 120b, ipc during the course of the investigation, the deputy superintendent of police, central bureau of investigation, made an application on march 12, 1970, to the special magistrate, stating that it was essential for purposes of investigation that the hair which had been recovered from the scene of occurrence should be examined .....

Tag this Judgment!

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