Rajasthan Court September 1969 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.
Mst. Mooli Devi Vs. the Pareek Commercial Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-29-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Raj78; [1971]41CompCas625(Raj)
Bhandari, C.J. 1. This special appeal from the judgment dated the 18th September, 1968 under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance arises under the following circumstances. The respondent No. 1 in this appeal, the Pareek Commercial Bank Ltd. (hereinafter called the Bank) was ordered to be wound up on 31st July, 1952. The Official Liquidator obtained certain orders from this Court for the realisation of various sums of money from Vastulal Pareek, respondent No. 2 in this appeal, who was Chairman of the said bank. The execution petition, for execution of these orders was transferred to the Court of District Judge, Bikaner and certain properties were attached. Shrimati Mooli Devi who is the appellant before us, filed an objection petition under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil P. C. before the District Judge which was rejected on 17th December 1960. Thereafter she applied for leave to this Court to file suit under Order 21, Rule 63, Civil P. C. and such leave was granted on 11th Decemb...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajasthan Industries Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1969
Reported in: [1970]76ITR212(Raj)
Bhandari, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C' (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'). In this case the assessee is a limited company. For the assessment year 1955-56, the assessee was assessed on a total income of Rs. 56,887 and the income-tax payable was determined at Rs. 24,710. The net surplus available for distribution as dividend to the shareholders was Rs. 32,177. No dividend was declared by the company. The same happened in the assessment year 1956-57. The Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Jaipur, took proceedings against the company under Section 23 A(1) of the Act in respect of both the assessment years and made an order in writing that the company was liable to pay super-tax at the rate of four annas in the rupee on the undistributed balance of the total income for the assessment year 1955-56, and by another order held the company liable to pay super-tax at the ...
The Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajasthan, Jaipur Vs. Indra and Co., J ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Raj207; [1971]79ITR702(Raj)
Bhandari, C.J. 1. This is a reference by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A', hereinafter called the 'Tribunal', under Section 256(1) of the Indian, Income-Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter called the Act, made at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-Tax. 2. Messers. Indra and Company, Jodhpur, a registered firm under the Act and one of its partners Shri Jiwanlal Maheshwari had to submit their income-tax returns under Section 139(1) of the Act by or before 30th June, 1962. Both of them made applications to the Income-Tax Officer, A Ward, Jodhpur, for extending the time for filing their returns and the time was extended upto 31-8-62 in both the cases. Again, applications were made for extension of the time and they were granted time upto 20-9-62 and further extension was granted upto 30-9-62, but the returns were not filed even on that day. The said Income-tax Officer then served notice on the assessees under Section 139(2) of the Act calling upon them to file returns with...
Maharaja of Jaipur Museum Trust, City Palace, Jaipur Vs. the State of ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-13-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Raj151
ORDERV.P. Tyagi, J.1. This writ petition, has been filed by a Trust known as His Highness the Maharaja of Jaipur Museum Trust, City Palace, Jaipur, (hereinafter called the Trust) under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge the levy of entertainment tax on the proceeds received by the Trust for allowing admission of the visitors to the museum on payment of certain fees prescribed by the Trust.2. His Highness the Maharaja of Jaipur by a registered deed created a Trust on the 16th April, 1959, and founded a museum in a portion of the city palace, Jaipur. It was a public charitable Trust. His Highness had a vast collection of various articles of historical, scientific, literary and archaeological importance which came in his possession from several generations. The Maharaia relinquished all his rights., title and interest in those articles and handed over them to be placed in a museum for which the aforesaid Trust was created by him. According to the petitioner, this museum was foun...
Mohan Lal Vs. Lakhe Khan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-13-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN370
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This revision application has been filed by the defendant-tenant from an order of the Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur dated 17-7-1969 by which the learned Judge upheld the order of the Additional Munsiff-Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur dated 18-1-1969 whereby the defence of the defendant was struck out under Section 13(6) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The non-petitioner Lakhe Khan filed the suit out of which this revision applicatian arises on 4-7-1967 against the petitioner for ejectment from the premises in question inter alia on the ground that the defendant had neither paid nor tender - the amount of rent due from him for more than six months. On 12-9-1967 the defendant-petitioner made an application under Section 13(4) of the Act on which the Court passed an order on 20-12-67 directing the defendant to deposit the arrears of rent, along with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per ann...
Ram Prasad Vs. Shri Kishan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN385
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment and decree of learned District Judge, Bhilwara, dated November 5, 1962. The case came before this Court on an earlier occasion and the facts have been mentioned at length in the judgment of Modi, J. dated September 9, 1961, in S.B. Civil Regular First Appeal No. 24 of 1956. As this appeal succeeds on a short but sure point, it is not necessary for me to state the facts at length.2. It will be sufficient to say that the plaintiff carried on the business of commission agency in the name of Ganesh Das Shri Krishn, in Bhilwara. He pleaded that Ram Parshad (defendant No. 1), the present appellant, purchased 73 bales of cotton from him, through his agent Kanhayalal (defendant No. 2) in two instalments, in Sambat 2005, costing Rs. 11,208/12/6, and paid Rs. 11,084/7/6, so that Rs. 124/5- remained due from him on that account. There is no dispute regarding this liability. The plaintiff further pleaded that the defendant purchased 264 bale...
Mana Lal Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-03-1969
Reported in: 1969WLN361
B.P. Beri, J.1. This is an application seeking the revision of the order passed by the Special Judge, Rajasthan, Jaipur City dated the 14th of February, 1969, whereby he held that the Delhi Special Police Establishment had authority to investigate this case and he had jurisdiction to try it.2. A few facts may be stated to appreciate the obections raised by the accused-applicant Manna Lai. He was an Accounts Clerk-cum-Cashier during March and April, 1964, in the office of the Officer Commanding, 57 Rajasthan Battalion N.C.C., at Bikaner. The prosecution alleged that it was his duty to encash bills from the banks and disburse the amounts to the staff and to account for the moneys so received and paid. On the 13th of April, 1964, when the cash box in charge of the applicant was opened it disclosed a shortage of Rs. 1,692,36 and the prosecution says that he had mis-appropriated the amount. The Delhi Police Establishment investigated the case and submitted a report. A criminal case No. 22 o...
Mahalakshmi Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-02-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR517(Raj)
Bhandari, C.J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A' (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'), has made this reference under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called 'the Act').2. The Mahalakshmi Mills Co. Ltd., the assessee in the case, is a limited company established in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Indian Companies Act, 1913. It carried on business of manufacturing cotton textiles at Beawar. Article 75 of the articles of association of this company provided for the appointment of agents, secretaries, treasurers, chairman and managing director and for their remuneration. It runs as follows :'Rai Sahib Seth Kundan Mal, son of Seth Hansraj, proprietor of the firm of Seth Kundan Mal Lal Chand of Beawar, and Seth Vithal Das Rathi, son of Seth Damodar Das Rathi, proprietor of the firm of Seth Thakurdas Khinvaraj of Beawar, or their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, representatives or their duly authorised agents or such other...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›