Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: rajasthan Year: 1970 Page 1 of about 11 results (0.009 seconds)

Jan 20 1970 (HC)

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Shri Guman Singh and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-20-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Raj191; 1970(3)WLN17

..... is not likely to occur in actual practice, is not justified in our opinion. 25. the learned single judge has also observed that he was not able to follow the rationale behind the provision, that while assessing the work during the last 5 years an officer gets a credit of mark for an adverse entry with punishment; he gets a deduction .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 19 1970 (HC)

Vyas Gopichand Vs. Mattoo Lal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-19-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Raj237

..... in the alternative that he had acquired a right of way by prescription through the 'tibara'. it is submitted that the learned senior civil judge did not correctly appreciate the rationale of the decision in kesardeo v. nathmal, air 1966 bom 266, and that the principle laid down in magniram v. rustam, 1961 raj lw 213, and sayrabai v. ahmedji, air .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 1970 (HC)

Munni Lal Garg Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-23-1970

Reported in : AIR1970Raj00; AIR1970Raj164; 1970WLN78

l.n. chhangani, j.1. muni lal gani of karampur has filed this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for an appropriate writ, order or direction to the effect that (i) rule 15(ii) of the rajasthan higher judicial service rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to be the rules) be declared ultra vires and (ii) resondents nos. 1 and 2, i.e the state of rajasthan and the high court of judicature for rajasthan, be directed not to proceed with the making of the selections for recruitment to the higher judicial service from amonst the advocates. a prayer for quashing the proceedings for the selection which have already been undertaken, has also been made.2. the relevant facts are these. the petitioner is an advocate practising at shri karanpur, district ganganagar. after passing, his l.l.b. examination in the year 1954 he was enrolled as a pleader first grade by the rajasthan high court in the year 1954. he was later on enrolled as an advocate of the rajasthan high court under the advocates act in the year 1962. the rules came into force on 21-1-1969. rule 8 thereof provides for two sources of recruitment:(1) by promotion from amongst the members of the rajasthan judicial service, or(2) by direct recruitment from the advocates who have practised in the high court or courts subordinate thereto for a period of not less than seven years.rule 15 prescribed the qualifications for a candidate for direct recruitment to the service; sub-rule (ii) states that a candidate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 1970 (HC)

Basudev Vs. Damodar Lal

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-29-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Raj115

c.m. lodha, j. 1. in this second appeal by the defendant-tenant two points have been argued on behalf of the appellant. it is contended in the first instance that section 2 (2) proviso (e) of the raiasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950 (which, hereinafter, will be referred to as the 'act') is ultra vires of article 14 of the constitution of india and is, therefore, liable to be struck down. it is submitted that it is on account of the aforesaid provision that the defendant-appellant has not been given protection of the said act. in the second place it is contended that the finding of the learned district judge no. 1, jaipur city, jaipur, that the plaintiff requires the room in question bona fide for his personal necessity is not sustainable on account of omission on the part of the learned judge to consider that only a little before the service of notice of termination of tenancy, the plaintiff had let out other rooms in the building. 2. i would first consider the question of constitutionality of section 2 (2) proviso (e) of the act. but before i do so, i may observe that according to the plaintiff the room in question, which is the subject-matter of this litigation was constructed in november 1964 and the suit was brought on 25th of may, 1967, that is, after about three years and one month of the completion of the construction of the room; whereas according to the defendant more than ten years had elapsed on the date of the institution of the suit since .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1970 (HC)

Pukhraj Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-20-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN518

l.s. mehta, j.1. the deceased raghunath darji, aged about 50 years, was incharge of a water-hut, opened by one nanoolal sukhwal, p.w. 16, in merta city for offering free water to padestrians. he was drawing rs. 35/- per month in lieu of his services. his wife mst. rampyari was doing some domestic work in three households. she was earning about rs. 45/- permensum. they had three children, namely, kalu, p.w. 17, (aged about 11 to 14 years), bhagwati (nearly 7 years' old) and navrat (aged approximately 5 years). some two years prior to the date of the occurrence (i.e., april 2, 1968), raghunath had sold his house, situate in the village of his birth, bhakri, for rs. 600/- to rs. 1000/-, to one moolchand. of the money received, he deposited rs. 300/- with amrit raj alias babulal mahajan, p.w.1, a resident of merta city, for safe custody no receipt on account of the money was passed by the depository in favour of the depositor 'later on p.w.15 mst. rampyari also deposited her three gold ornaments, namely, 'tadda' article 1, 'tussi' article 2 and 'bor' article 3 containing gold weighing about 6 tolas, with amrit raj somewhere in october, 1967 in february, 1968 (that is about two months before the occurence) the ornaments were brought back by mst. rampyari from the depository. a few days before the incident the accused pukhraj went to the water hut, which was in charge of raghunath, to drink water, pukhraj inter alia inquired of raghunath as to how he was eking out his livelihood .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 12 1970 (HC)

Poonam Chand Joshi and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-12-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Raj12; 1970(3)WLN326

p.n. singhal, j. 1. these three writ petitions arise out of facts which are quite similar. they have been argued together by the learned counsel for the parties and i shall dispose them of by this judgment as suggested by them.2. all the three petitioners were confirmed employees of the union of india (respondent no. 1) serving in the northern railway. they were going on 55, when they were served by three separate orders each of which has been marked ex. 1, giving, inter alia three months' notice of their retirement. the orders were issued by the divisional personnel officer with the approval of divisional superintendent, jodhpur. they were issued on different dates. in the case of poonamchand, order, ex, 1 was issued on september 4, 1968, retiring him finally from december 15, 1968. it is not disputed that the order was served on him on october 1, 1969 (1968 ?). there is, however, no dispute about the inadequacy of the notices given to pukhraj and kanwar singh, so that it is not necessary to give their dates. the petitioners have moved this court on a number of grounds which i shall have occasion to examine when i deal with the arguments of their learned counsel. it will be sufficient to say that although it was one of grievances of the petitioners that the notices were issued by an authority subordinate to that by which they were appointed, that ground has not been pressed for my consideration.3. the respondents have denied the allegations regarding the invalidity of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1970 (HC)

Ratanlal Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-14-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN334

l.s. mehta, j.1. this is a review application submitted on behalf of ratan lal under secection 561-a, cr. p.c., for re-hearing the case. the avermenta in the application are that s.b. criminal revision no. 347 of 1968, was called for hearing on 24-10-1969. that day mr. u.m. trivedi, advocate for the petitioner, was not present, his junior shri krishna murari advocate asked for an adjournment of the case for monday the 27th october, 1969, when mr. trivedi was to come to jodhpur. shri krishna murari further prayed that he was unable to argue the case as the relevant case file was with the senior counsel. this court. however, refused to adjourn the case and acting on the facts narrated in the judgment of the court below presumed that the moveable property had not been seized from the petitioner. the petitioner prayed that in these circumstances the case may be reheard and proper direction be given. the above application was admitted by this court on january 12, 1970, keeping in view the principle that the party adversely affected should be given proper hearing before making an order of the return of the seized property state, bank of india v. rajendra kumar : 1969crilj659 . a notice was then issued to the opposite party. in this manner the review application has come up before this court for hearing today.2. the brief facts of the case are alleged to be that mst. virji, widow of kajorimal bhandari of chittor, died on march 25, 1961. it was suspected that the woman was murdered. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 21 1970 (HC)

Vaney Singh Vs. State

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-21-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN650

kan singh, j.1. this is a revision application by one vaney singh against the appellate judgment of the additional sessions judge, sirohi, partly allowing the petitioner's appeal against his conviction under sections 353 and 448 indian penal' code, and the sentence of six months and three months rigorous imprisonment respectively on these counts by the mnsif magistrate, sirohi. while the learned aditionial sessions judge maintained the conviction of the accused for the offence under section 315 indian penal code as also the sentence of six months rigorous imbrisonment, be set aside the conviction of the accused for the offence under section 443 indian penal code.2. p.w. 2 jaideo singh patwari of sirohi was doing his office work in the ratwar khana' on 14-8-67; at about 6.00 p.m. the, accused eame to the patwar khana and asked jaideo singh to allot him some land. jaideo singh explained to him that he was not competent to make any allotment of land. this annoyed the accused who then assaulted the patwari with a lathi. the patwari then left the place' namely, the verandah where he was sitting and entered into the room. he raised an alarm which attricted padam singh, up sarpanch and one ridmal singh patwari of another village, positra. they persuaded the accused to go away. while leaving the accused threatened jaideo singh that he would not leave him in future. on the next day i. e. 15 8-67, jaideo singh lodged a complaint in the court of the sub divisional magistrate, sirohi. .....

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!

Aug 28 1970 (HC)

Umrao Chand and ors. Vs. Inder Chand and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-28-1970

Reported in : 1970WLN494

c.b. bhargava, j.1. this is an appeal from the judgment of the senior civil judge no. 1 jodhpur, dismissing the plaintiffs suit for partition and recovery of arrears of rent.2. for the proper appreciation of the facts, the following pedigree showing the relationship of the parties is set out below: udaichand | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | dharam chand kewal chand *zorawar mal | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | umrao chand @dhanpat chand 'inder chand (plaintiff) (died in smt. (deft. 1 along with 2009 migsar v. 2= his sons & grand-sons 3-11-1952 (defts. 2 to 5) *zorawar mal | --------------------------- | | himmat mal (d.w.12) chanda mal | ------------------------------ | | mohan mal sumat mal (d.w. 8) @dhanpat chand | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | ugam chand manohar paras prakash prem chand pratap chand (deft. 6) chand chand chanda (d. 10) (d. 11) | (deft. 7) (deft. 8) (deft. 9) | | | raja (deft. 16) -------------------------------------------------- | | | | shanti mahavir rikhab munnichand chand chand chand (d. 15) (d. 12) (d. 13) (d. 14) inder chand (deft. 1) | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | | | bhopal chand bhag chand sumer chand shbos chand (deft. 2) (deft. 3) (deft. 4) (deft. 5)3. in this suit, umraochand, his sons and grandsons have claimed partition of house mentioned .....

Tag this Judgment!

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