Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: rajasthan Year: 1976 Page 1 of about 22 results (0.009 seconds)

Mar 10 1976 (HC)

Kesari Lal Vs. Sub-divisional Officer and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-10-1976

Reported in : 1977WLN443

rajindar sachar, j.1. this petition has been filed against the judgment of the board of revenue against the proceedings under ceiling law which were started against one smt. chandrakanta under chapter iiib added to the rajasthan tenancy act. 1955 (hereinafter to be called the 'old law').2. the land was originally recorded in the name of one smt. gulab bai, who had adopted govindlal, son of petitioner no. 1. after the death of smt. gulab bai, the land was recorded in the name of govindlal and after his death, in the name of smt. chandrakanta, who was recorded as the khatedar tenant. since she was holding the land in excess of the ceiling area, notices were issued to her and the present petitioners joined the proceedings and claimed one fourth share in favour of each of the three petitioners and one-fourth share in favour of ram narain, another son of keshari lal. an effort was made before the authorities to contend that the petitioners were in possession of the land since 1957 on the basis of one mutation entry made in that year, though that entry was not repeated subsequently. the authorities below have come to the conclusion that in view of the entry in the name of smt. chandrakanta as a khatedar tenant, the land must be presumed to belong to her and on that basis surplus area has been determined under chapter iiib of the rajasthan tenancy act, taking smt. chandrakanta as a khatedar tenant. the petitioners having failed in the proceedings before the load of revenue have come .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1976 (HC)

Sumer Singh Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-14-1976

Reported in : AIR1976Raj144

orderd.p. gupta, j.1. there was a bus route from borawar to pushkar (hereinafter referred to as 'the route') about 90 kilometers in length, which lay partly in jodhpur region and partly in the jaipur region of the state of rajasthan. the operators of the route appear to have submitted an application for the extension of the route from pushkar to ajmer, but the state transport authority, jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the s. t. a.') rejected the aforesaid application by its resolution dated february 5, 1973 and did not grant the desired extension. the petitioner no. 1 is the sarpanch of the gram panchayat, baser in nagaur district, while the petitioner no. 2 is the sarpanch of gram panchayat, kadel in ajmer district. the two petitioners, acting on behalf of the inhabitants of the area and the panchayats of which they were sarpanchas some time later submitted representation to the s. t. a. that the route in question should be extended upto ajmer so as to make available the inhabitants of the area a direct bus service for reaching ajmer and thereby avoid unnecessary change of buses at pushkar.the s. t. a. then got a survey conducted in the matter and the survey report favoured the grant of an extension in the interest of the travelling public. the s. t. a. thereupon gave notices to the existing operators of the route under section 48(3) (xxi) of the motor vehicles act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') to show cause as to why the route of their permits be not varied by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1976 (HC)

Sumersingh Vs. the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-14-1976

Reported in : 1976WLN91

d.p. gupta, j.1. there was a bus route from borawar to pushkar (hereinafter referred to as 'the route') about 90 kilometers in length, which lay partly in jodhpur region and party in the jaipur region of the state of rajasthan. the operators of the route appear to have submitted an application for the extension of the route from pushkar to ajmer, but the state transport authority, jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the sta) rejected the aforesaid application by its resolution dated february 5, 1973 and did not grant the desired extension. the petitioner no. 1 is the sarpanch of the gram panchayat baser in nagour district, while the petitioner no. 2 is the sarpanch of gram panchayat, kadel in ajmer district. the two petitioners, acting on behalf of the inhabitants of the area and the panchayats of which they were sarpanchs some time later submitted a representation to the sta that the route in question should be extended upto amer so as to make available the inhabitants of the area a direct bus service for reaching ajmer and thereby avoid unnecessary change of bus at pushkar the sta then got a survey conducted in the matter and the survey report favoured the grant of an extension in the interest of the traveling public. the sta thereupon gave notices to the existing operators of the route under section 48(3)(xxi) of the motor vehicles act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') to show cause as to why the route of their permits be not varied by inclusion of the portion of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 1976 (HC)

Kayum Ali Vs. Alanoor

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-11-1976

Reported in : 1976WLN(UC)97

s.n. modi, j.1. the only point involved in this execution second appeal is whether the consent decree passed on 7-5-70 on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties is a nullity as, it has been passed in contravention of the provisions of section 13 of the rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the act).2. this appeal arises out of these facts. the respondent was a tenant of a room belonging to the appellant at a monthly rent of rs. 3,50. the respondent did not pay rent to the landlord for a considerable period of time. ultimately the plaintiff landlord filed a suit for eviction and arrears of rent amounting to rs. 245/- on 19-9-1966.3. the suit was resisted by the tenant on various grounds which need not be mentioned here.4. evidence wan led by both the parties in proof of the issues. on 7-5-70 a compromise petition was filed in the court which was signed by both the parties. the court recorded the compromise and passed a decree for eviction an accordance with the terms of the compromise the contents of the compromise petition show that the tenant agreed to vacate the suit premises on or before 1-8-1970 & the landlord relinquished his right to recover the arrears of rent. when the tenant did not vacate the suit premises on 1-8-70, an execution petition was filed by the landlord on 7-8-70 objection was raised on behalf of the tenant that the decree was a nullity as it was passed in contravention of the provisions .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1976 (HC)

Madan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-12-1976

Reported in : 1976CriLJ1485

m.l. jain, j.1. this appeal has been directed against the judgment of the learned special judge, jaipur district, jaipur dated 25-9-1972 by which he convicted and sentenced the appellant madan lal as follows:(1) under section 161, i.p.c. to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of rs. 50/-, in default of payment whereof, to simple imprisonment for one month, and(2) under sub-section (2) read with clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 5 of the prevention of corruption act, to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of rs. 100/-, in default of payment whereof, to simple imprisonment for two months.the substantive sentences were to run concurrently. i have heard arguments and examined the record.2. the appellant was a survey amin in the settlement department in circle amer, district jaipur at the relevant time. one kushlaram p.w. 1 asked him to survey his land and demarcate it into separate holdings for himself and his six brothers. the appellant demanded rs. 100/- as bribe for doing the job. the bargain was settled at bs. 50/- which also kushlaram was not prepared to pay. he approached the anti-corruptton department upon, which a trap was laid on 28-12-1970 in nawlakha bagh, amer where the land of kushlaram was situated. he produced five currency notes each of rs. 10/- before the deputy superintendent of police shri ram singh to which phenolphthalein powder was applied. when the accused went to the field of kushlaram and began his survey, he demanded the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1976 (HC)

Poosa Ram and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-17-1976

Reported in : 1976WLN135

kalyan dutta sharma, j.1. criminal appeal no. 698 of 1975 filed by poosa ram and s.b. criminal appeal no. 749 of 1975, filed by amia alias amrit lal arise out of on and the same judgment of the additional sessions judge, jodhpur, dated 25th october, 1975, by which poosa ram was convicted under section 307, i.p.c. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer eight months rigorous imprisonment and amia appellant was convicted under section 326/34, i.p.c. and awarded sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rs. 400/-, and in default of payment of fine rigorous imprisonment for four months by his very judgment another co-accused ghanshyam was convicted under section 352/34, i.p.c. and was released after admonition under section 3 of the probation of offenders act, ghanshyam, however, did not file an-appeal against his conviction and sentence.2. the prosecution cases against both the appellants may be stated, in brief, as follows. on the intervening night of 11th and 12th june, 1973, laxmi narayan son of motilal ghanchi was sleeping inside his house at about 11.30 pm. his brother madan lal also was sleeping in the house. at that time somebody called for madan lal from outside. on hearing the call laxmi narayan got up from his bed and saw one tempo rickshaw standing outside cut side his house. he saw one ghanshyam ghanchi standing by the side of the rickshaw calling .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1976 (HC)

Madan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-17-1976

Reported in : 1976WLN40

m.l. jain, j.1. this appeal has been directed against the judgment of the learned special judge, jaipur district, jaipur dated 25.9.72 by which he convicted and sentenced the appellant madan lal as follows:(1) under section 161 i.p.c to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of rs. 50/-, in default of payment whereof, to simple imprisonment for one month, and(2) under sub-section (2) read with clause (d) of sub-section (1) or section 5 of the prevention of corruption act, to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of rs. 100/-, in default of payment whereof, to simple imprisonment for two months.the substantive sentences were to run concurrently. i have heard arguments and examined the record.2. the appellant was a survey amin in the settlement department in circle amer, district jaipur at the relevant time. one kushalaram pw. 1 asked him to survey his land & demarcate it into separate holdings for himself and his six brothers. the appellant demanded rs. 100/- as bribe for doing the job. the bargain was settled at rs. 50/- which also kushlaram was not prepared to pay. he approached the anti corruption department upon which a trap was laid on 28.12.70 in nawlakha bagh, amer where the land of kushlaram was situated. he produced five currency notes each of rs. 10/- before the deputy superintendent of police sari ram singh to when phenolphthalein powder was applied. when the accused went to she field of kushlaram and began his survey, he demanded the amount. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1976 (HC)

The Jaipur Milk Supply Scheme Vs. the Judge, Labour Court and Two ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-03-1976

Reported in : 1976WLN129

c.m. lodha, j.1. the petitioner is a rajasthan government undertaking for supply of milk to the city of jaipur. it is alleged by the petitioner that it is under the animal husbandry department of the rajasthan government, though this fact is denied by the non-petitioner no. 2 manoharkumar, who is the contesting respondent in this case. the respondent no. 2 manoharkumar was appointed as a van clerk on temporary basis for a period of three months vide annecure. 'a' and his period of service was extended from time to time. he was suspended from service along with three other employees by the order dated 26.7.1969 (annexure 'f') by the general manager of the petitioner undertaking on account of a complaint having been received from sawai man singh hospital, jaipur about adulteration of milk. thereafter his services were terminated with effect from 31.10.1969 vide annexure 'o' dated 30.9.1969. it appears that after the termination of his services, he was served with a chare-sheet on 3.11.1969 along with a statement of allegations and he submitted his reply on 26.11.1969. it is further alleged by the petitioner that a preliminary enquiry was also held on 20th september, 1969. however the respondent no. 2 raised a dispute before the government regarding termination of his service and the government made a reference to the labour court under section 10(a)(c) read with section 12(5) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (which will hereinafter be called 'the act'). the judge, labour .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 12 1976 (HC)

Babulal Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-12-1976

Reported in : 1977CriLJ59

m.l. shrimal, j.1. this appeal has been directed against the judgment dated november 26, 1974 of the learned additional sessions judge no. 2, jodhpur wihereby the accused-appellant babulal, son of moolchand sadh was convicted for the murder of babulal, son of chhotu ram harijan, under section 302, i.p.c, and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of which he was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year.2. the prosecution story in a nutshell is that on april 27, 1974 between 4.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. babulal harijan (since deceased) had gone to the hotel owned and managed by the brother of the accused. at that time the author of the first information report p.w. 6 kamal happened to come to the shop to take tea. the accused asked babulal harijan (since deceased) why he was not being seen near the hotel in those days. he replied that he had not gone anywhere out of jodhpur, whereupon the accused further enquired, what made him to bully the hotel boys. the deceased protested and denied the allegations which annoyed the accused, who in turn told that he would make him forget his 'dadagiri' (scoundrelism). uttering these words the accused picked up a pair of scissors in his hand which was lying on the counter. he caught hold of the neck of babulal harijan (since deceased) and thrust the pair of scissors in his chest. pulling the pair of scissors out, he rushed towards his house. at the time when the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 1976 (HC)

Bhurekhan Vs. State of Rajasthan and 14 ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-01-1976

Reported in : 1976WLN73

v.p. tyagi, ag. c.j.1. this appeal of bhure khan is directed against the judgment of the learned single judge dated october 9, 1975 dismissing the writ petition of bhure khan against whom vote of no confidence was passed in a meeting presided over by the acting tehsildar.2. bhure khan was elected sarpanch of gram panchayat kayamser dhandhoori having a total strength of 12 members only. a requisition was presented by the members of the panchayat expressing their desire to pass a vote of no-confidence against the petitioner the additional district development officer by his order dated april 7, 1975 appointed tehsildar jhunjhunu to preside over the meeting. it so appears that the tehsildar on the day of meeting was on leave and, therefore, naib tehsildar jhunjhunu who was acting as tehsildar presided over the meeting. the meeting was attended by the appellant bhure khan also. out of 10 members of the panchayat who attended the meeting 9 voted against bhure khan with a result that the acting tehsildar declared that bhure khan had lost confidence of the panchayat. the proceedings taken in the meeting of the panchayat were then challenged by bhure khan by preferring a writ petition before this court mainly on the ground that. the acting tehsildar had no authority to preside over the meeting convened on april 24, 1975 to discuss the vote of no confidence. the learned judge after considering various authorities cited before him held that the acting. tehsildar was competent to .....

Tag this Judgment!


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