Rajasthan Court September 1960 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.
K.P. Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Raj152
Ranawat, J.1. This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Branch) under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The following questions have been referred :1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the debit entry of Rs. 1 lakh made to. the account of Kishan Chand and the credit entries of Rs. 60,000/- and Rs. 40,000/-made to the accounts of Shri Maya Ram and Shrimati Jasodha Bai operated as, a valid gift of the said sum of Rs. 1 lakh in their favour in the face of there being only a cash balance of Rs. 603/-/- in the account books of the assesses firm? 2. If the answer to the first question is in the negative whether still the assessee firm is entitled to claim a deduction of the interest, credited in the two accounts under the; provisions of Section 10(2) (iii) of the Income-tax Act? 2. The Tribunal has stated the facts and circumstances of this case as noted below-The assessment year under consideration is 1954-55, the previous year being...
K. P. Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, New Delhi.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1960
Reported in: [1961]42ITR650(Raj)
RANAWAT, J. - This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench) under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The following questions have been referred :'(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the debit entry of Rs. 1 lakh made to the account of Kishan Chand and the credit entries of Rs. 60,000 and Rs. 40,000 made to the accounts of Shri Maya Ram and Shrimati Jasodha Bai operated as valid gift of the said sum of Rs. 1 lakh in their favour in the face of there being only a cash balance of Rs. 603 in the account books of the assessee firm ?(2) If the answer to the first question is in the negative whether still the assessee firm is entitled to claim a deduction of the interest credited in the two accounts under the provisions of section 10(2)(iii) of the Income-tax Act ?The Tribunal has stated the facts and circumstances of this case as noted below.The assessment year under consideration is 1954-55, the previous year being the period ran...
Ram Chander and ors. Vs. Jamna Shankar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Raj12
ORDERJagat Narayan, J.1. This is a revision application by the defendants in a suit which was referred to arbitration through the intervention of the court against an order of the Civil Judge Sojat pronouncing judgment and granting decree according to the award under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 on the ground that no notice as contemplated under Section 14(2) was given and they were consequently deprived of an opportunity of filing objections against the award.2. The application was contested on behalf of the plaintiffs. A number of preliminary objections were taken. But before going into them it is necessary to state the facts.3. The plaintiffs are members of a joint Hindu family. The defendants also constitute a joint Hindu family, Jassulal defendant No. 1 being the father of Mangilal, Shyamlal and Ramchander defendants Nos. 2 to 4. It is not disputed now that Jassulal as manager of the family of the defendants borrowed money from time to time from the plaintiffs on the se...
Sheo Prasad Govindram Holani Vs. Kamakhya Prasad Sheobux Roy
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Raj181
Jagat Narayan, J.1. The facts giving rise to this reference are these. The plaintiff instituted a suit for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,717/- on 5-2-54 on the basis of a pronote dated 22-7-52 for a sum of Rs. 3250/-. This pronote was executed at Sikar which was formerly in the erstwhile State of Jaipur. Under the Jaipur Stamp Act which was in force in Sikar on the date of the execution of the pronote it was chargeable with stamp duty of -/5/- annas. The promissory note in suit however bore a stamp -/4/-annas only. The trial court dismissed the suitholding that the promissory note was inadmissible in evidence being insufficiently stamped.On appeal the learned District Judge held that the Indian Stamp Act had come into force on 15th May 1952 by virtue of the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 and that the document was properly stamped under the Stamp Act which was in force on the date of its execution. He accordingly remanded the case to the trial court for decision in accordan...
Mohammad Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Raj174
Dave, J.1. This is an application in revision filed by accused Mohammad who has been committed to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Pali, by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pali, to stand his trial for an offence under Section 302, I. P. C.2. It is contended by the petitioner that his commitment is illegal and therefore it should be quashed. Ho had filed a similar application in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Pali, but it was rejected on 31-3-60. Thereupon, he filed another application in this Court and it came for hearing before a learned Judge on 7-6-60, The learned Judge was of opinion that an important question of law was involved in this case and so he thought it proper to refer it to a larger Bench. This is how the matter has come before us.3. Before dealing with the question of law, which has given rise to this revision application, it would be proper to set out briefly the prosecution case against the applicant. The prosecution story is that on the night between the 27th and 28...
Hasan Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Raj182
Dave, J.1. This is a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by one Hasan Khan.2. The petitioner's case is, that his parents are residents of Amber in Jaipur district and that he was also bom at Amber. In 1955, he was prosecuted in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amber, on the allegations that he had migrated to Pakistan in 1950, that he had become a national of Pakistan, that he had returned to India on a passport and had over-stayed the period for which he was allowed to stay in India. He denied all the allegations made against him and eventually he was acquitted of the offence under Section 3 of the Indian Passport Act of 1920 on 27-9-56 by Magistrate First Class Jaipur District to whom the case was transferred. Thereafter, he was living peacefully with his family members at Amber.On the morning of 14-9-1959, a constable came to his house and told him that he was wanted by the Station House Officer, Amber. He, therefore, went to the police station...
Fatehlal Vs. Nandlal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Raj241
C.B. Bhargava, J. 1. This is an appeal by the decree-holder against the decision of the learned District Judge, Bhilwara dated 28th May 1957 in execution proceedings.2. It appears that on 9th December, 1955 a decree for Rs. 1450/- and delivery of a flour mill with an engine in running condition was passed in favour of the appellant. There was a further stipulation in the decree that the judgment-debtor would hand over the mill and the engine to the decree-holder within a month of the decree, in default there would be a decree for Rs. 5000/- with costs in favour of the decree-holder. The judgment-debtor failed to deliver the mill and the engine within the time provided in the decree.The decree-holder after the expiry of about five months applied for the execution of the money decree claiming Rs. 5000/- besides the sum ofRs. 1450/- and prayed for the enforcement of the decree by attachment of the judgment-debtor's pro- petty. It may be mentioned that during the period of five months the ...
Gulab Chand Vs. Hari Bux
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-01-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ401
ORDERL.N. Chhangani, J.1. This matter has come before me for decision of a preliminary objection.2. Haribux son of Kundanmal of Kuchaman the opposite party, filed an appeal on 15-5-59 in this Court against the order of the District Judge, Merta setting aside his election. On the same date he filed an application for staying the operation of the order of' the District Judge and filed an affidavit in support of the stay application. In the affidavit he made a statement that he had not handed over the charge either as member or as Chairman of the Municipal 'Board. The stay application was finally decided by Bapna, J., on 6-8-1959.The appeal itself was decided on 7-10-1959. One Girdhari Lal originally submitted an application on 12-8-1959 requesting the Court to file a complaint against the respondent under Section 193 I.P.C. for giving a patently false statement in the affidavit. Subsequently Girdhari Lal put another application on 18-9-1959 stating that the previous application put in fo...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›