Rajasthan Jaipur Court August 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S Rajendra Prasad Subash Chand. Vs. U O I and ors.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-26-2010
1. This income-tax appeal has been filed by the appellant-assessee challenging the judgment dated 20.03.2009, of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench 'B' Jaipur, (for short, 'the ITAT') whereby the ITAT upheld the judgment dated 26.03.2007 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Alwar (for short, 'the CIT'), who in its turn, confirmed the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. Factual matrix of the case is that on 06.05.2002 a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') was conducted at the business premises of the appellant-assessee in which it was found that the books of account had been written only up to 26.04.2002 and no entries were thereafter made till the date of survey. The appellant-assessee, however, on 02.12.2003 filed its return of income declaring income of Rs.6,69,050/- along-with audited balance-sheet, profit and loss account tax audit report dated 22.11.2003. Since the survey was carried out under Section 133A ...
Nandlal and ors. Vs. Devi Shankar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-26-2010
1. This special appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 15.03.2002 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants herein was dismissed. The appellants original writ petitioners in the writ petition, had challenged the judgment of the Board of Revenue dated 03.05.1989 by which the Board reversed the judgment and decree dated 20.10.1981 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota and that of the S.D.O. dated 30.04.1979. The factual matrix of the case is that the predecessor-in-title of the respondents herein, namely, Anandilal, filed a revenue suit in the year 1973 for partition and division of holding against the predecessor-in-title of the appellants, namely, Kanhaiyalal, claiming that he was co-sharer in the lands comprising of Khasra No.124 measuring 35 bigha and 3 biswa situated in village Talaiwala and Khasra No.134 measuring 5 biswa gair mumkin chahi, situated in village Hanotiya, Tehsil Ladpura, and prayed that half of the said land be ord...
Vinod Kumar. Vs. the State of Rajasthan.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
1. Accused-appellant Vinod Kumar S/0 Shukli Ram has preferred this appeal challenging his conviction and sentence recorded by Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Bharatpur in Sessions Case No.11/2002 vide the impugned judgment and order dated 25th September, 2002, whereby he has been convicted and sentenced under Section 302 IPC to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.500/-; in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months' additional rigorous imprisonment.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a typed report (Ex.P1) was lodged by P.W.1 Ramesh at Police Station, Nadbai on 14.3.2002 at 5:15 PM alleging inter alia that on that day in the noon at about 12 O' Clock, Vinod S/o Shukli @ Ramchand came to his brother Suresh's Barber shop situated at Halena Road, Nadbai and thereafter started quarreling with his brother Suresh by abusing him. It was further alleged that accused Vinod inflicted a number of blows by scissors (used for cutting hairs) ...
M/S Bahubali Stone Crusher and ors. Vs.Raj State Pollution Control and ...
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
(1) With the closure of their stone crushers, with the threat to their right to livelihood, the petitioners, the owners of the stone crushers, have rushed to this Court for protection. Since through these petitions, the petitioners have challenged two orders, both dated 04.02.2010, passed by the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board ('the Board', for short), these petitions are being decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of clarity, the facts from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2593/2010, M/s Bahubali Stone Crusher v. Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, are being narrated hereinafter.(2) It is the case of the petitioner-firm that it had established an industrial unit for production of grit stone at village Bolkhera, Tehsil Kaman, District Bharatpur. The petitioner-firm was not only duly registered with the Board, but vide order dated 15.05.2004, the Board had granted the consent to operate to the petitioner-firm for its unit. The said consent was valid till 30.04.2...
Puran Banjara and anr. Vs. Civil Judge (Jd) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-18-2010
1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 23.07.2010, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rajgarh, Alwar, whereby the learned Judge has allowed the application for appointment of the Commissioner filed by the respondent No.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 03.11.2009 the plaintiff-respondent filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against the petitioners for restraining them from taking into their possession and from raising construction over the land in dispute situated at village Bara, Tehsil Rajgarh, and also from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiff-respondent. In the suit, the plaintiff-respondent filed an application for appointment of a Commissioner. The Commissioner was duly appointed by the Court. 2. He submitted his report on 03.11.2009. The petitioners filed objection for appointment of the Commissioner and also filed written statement and denied the contents of the suit. On 05.11.2009, the learned trial court passed an order to...
Prabhu Dayal Boondwal. Vs. Alwar-bharatpur Anchlik GramIn Bank and anr ...
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-11-2010
1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 1/2/2006 by which, three writ petitions were dismissed by a common judgment. 2) Shri Rajendra Soni, learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate that appellants / writ-petitioners were wrongfully denied appointment on the post of Field Supervisors. It is contended that respondent No.1-Bank had sent an Indent of nine posts to the Banking Service Recruitment Board, which in turn advertised certain number of vacancies by a common advertisement. The advertisement pertained to the said vacancies and also for six other banks but with a condition that candidates would apply for appointment giving an option for particular bank but option once exercised would not be allowed to be changed under any circumstances.2. Learned counsel submitted that it was because that respondent-Bank had sent the Indent of nine vacancies for Alwar-Bharatpur Anchlik Gramin Bank...
Smt. Narbada Devi Sharma and anr. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-06-2010
1. Counsel submits that controversy raised herein has been decided by DB decision of this Court at principal seat Jodhpur in Special Appeal (Writ) 208/06 & bunch of others (State of Rajasthan v. Ramniwas Porwal) on 13/12/07 (Per Hon. Mr. Rajesh Balia, J.) (2008(2) WLC 406) clarifying the position ad infra: However, it may be clarified that because of the provisions made in Note 8 read with Note appended to Rule 6 a Senior Teacher drawing pay in second selection grade of 6500-10500 prior to 1.7.1998 and promoted as Senior Teacher but after 1.7.1989 who has not completed 10 years as Senior Teacher at the time of commencement of the Act his pay in pay-scale of 6500-10500 was protected as personal to him, though he would become eligible to such scale under the new rules of 1998 only on completion of 10 years. In this view of the matter, the rights of the respondents even under the aforesaid provision remain intact and unaffected and it could not have any adverse effect on them.2. But those...
Raju Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-05-2010
1. The case in hand is a chequered story and the prosecution case unfolds a pathetic chilling and sinister phenomenon whereby the life of a person was eliminated from this worldly scene and consigned to the heavenly abode by putting an end to his innocent life simply in a bid to exercise the powers of Police officials misused by them on the people in custody. The appellants before us are four Police officers of the rank of SHO and constables named Raju singh, Rajesh Kailash and Khem singh who have preferred their respective appeals against the judgment and order dated 20.12.2003 passed by learned Special Judge, SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Court, Jhalawar in Sessions case No.32/2003 (78/2001, 18/2000 & 4/2000), whereby they were convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302/331/348/201 alternatively under Sections 302/331/348/201 read with Section 34 of the IPC and were sentenced as under:- i)For the offence under Section 302/302 read with Section 34 of the IPC with imp...
Mahesh Verma and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on: Aug-03-2010
1. In this bunch of petitions, since a common question has been raised, hence being decided by the present order. All the petitioners are working as Vidhyarthi Mitra in various government educational institutions, but after the policy of rationalization and equalization was introduced by the State Government, some were displaced from their places of posting and services of some of them were terminated since there was no post available where they were discharging their duties as Vidhyarthi Mitra. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the controversy involved in the present petitions has been finally decided before the Main Seat at Jodhpur in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.8966/2009 (Prahalad Kumar Sharma v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 22.7.2010 with the following observations:-2. In view of aforesaid, these writ petitions are also disposed of in view of earlier decision of this Court by Single Bench as well as Division Bench and aforesaid quoted decisions of the State Governmen...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›