Rajasthan Court November 1972 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.
Bhanwar Lal and anr. Vs. Dhanraj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Raj212; 1972()WLN999
Kan Singh, J. 1. The second appeal before me is by the defendant. The subject matter of the litigation is the construction of a shop by the defendant on a Chabutra in the market of Pali. 2. The plaintiff-respondent has a shop in the same market. The plaintiff's case in brief was that the construction of the shop over the Chabutra by the defendant has caused discomfort amounting to nuisance to the plaintiff in multifarious ways; firstly it resulted in diminishing the light and air which the plantiffs' shop used to receive when the Chabutra was open; secondly the impugned construction created an obstruc-tion to the flow of foul water in a nearby narrow lane, which would consequently be absorbed in the lane itself and emitting foul smell; thirdly as a result of this construction the foul air caused by urination spoils from dogs or human excreta was prevented from spread-ins out from the mouth of the lane as hithertofore. On the other hand, the direction of the flowing-out foul air from th...
Roshan Lal Seth Vs. the University of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN874
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. Petitioner Roshan Lal has filed this writ petition and it arises out of the following circumstances.2. The petitioner appeared at the M.A. (Final) Examination held by University of Rajasthan in the year 1972 and was declared unsuccessful as he failed to obtain 36 percent aggregate marks, The petitioner's contention is that he had appeared in M.A. (Previous) examination in Economics in 1971 and had obtained out of the total of 400 in four papers 165 marks and was permitted to appear at M.A. Final examination in 1972 Out of total of 500 marks including Viva-voce test he secured in M.A. (Final) 169 marks. The petitioner's case is that according to Regulation 12 a candidate who wants to pass his M.A. Examination in any subject is required to get 25 percent marks in each individual paper both in M.A. Previous and Final examinations and has to secure 36 percent aggregate in the subject. According to the marks list supplied to the petitioner, out of 900 total marks he got 334...
Zoraster and Co. Private Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN956
1. We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. In M.M.Isphani Ltd. v. Commr. of Excess Profits Tax, West Bengal : [1955]27ITR188(Cal) it was held by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court that 'in spite of the apparently mandatory language of Section 66(5) its true import cannot be to require the High Court to answer the questions referred to it in all circumstances, irrespective of whether the parties appear before it or not. Before the duty contemplated by the section to decide the questions of law referred can arise, a hearing of the case must take place because the sub-section opens with the words, 'The High Court upon the hearing of any such case etc.' Where the party who has caused the Reference to be made and who is in the position of a plaintiff, fails to appear, no hearing of the case can take place and since the preliminary condition of the subsection is not satisfied in such a case, the consequent obligation of deciding the question of law and delivering a j...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lakshman Swaroop Gupta and Brothers
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-1972
Reported in: [1975]100ITR222(Raj); 1972()WLN1076
Beri, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ' C ', has referred the following question for our opinion ;' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the provisions of Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the cash credit of Rs. 20,000 in the books of account of the assessee on April 7, 1961, from his total income for the assessment year 1962-63 '2. The circumstances which have given rise to the question aforesaid, briefly, stated are these: Lakshman Swaroop Gupta is the proprietor of M/s. Lakshman Swaroop Gupta & Bros., Bharatpur (hereinafter called ' the assessee'), who deals in motor parts, electrical goods, miscellaneous articles, tyres and tubes. In the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment years 1961-62 (the previous year being April 16, 1960, to April 15, 1961) the Income-tax Officer found a cash credit entry in the sum of Rs. 20...
The Jaipur Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. Vs. the State of Rajasthan ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN1097
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. The Jaipur Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. Jaipur (hereinafter called the petitioner company) has filed this writ petition against the State of Rajasthan, he Inspector General of Police, the Superintendent of Police Jaipur, the Station House Officer, Police Station, Bani Park, Jaipur and the District Magistrate, Jaipur, praying that a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction be issued directing respondents NoSection 1 to 5 to perform their statutory duties under the provisions of the Police Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure to take appropriate legal action against respondents Nos. 6 to 33 and their associates who are committing criminal trespass and other offences in or near the mills of the petitioner company, and they may further be directed to remove the criminal trespass over the mill's premises immediately. It may be mentioned that the petitioner had impleaded Certain workmen as respondents Nos. 6 to 33, but Mr. Gupta, appearing on beh...
Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs. Idol Laxmanji Maharaj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN977
J.P. Jain, J.1. This second appeal by the defendant is against the appellate judgment and decree dated 30-7-69 dismissing his first appeal No. 104/69 as time barred.2. Respondent's suit for arrears of rent and for the ejectment of the defendant from the suit premises was decreed with costs on 30-11-68 by the Additional Munsiff Magistrate Ajmer City (East). Against this decree defendant Suresh Kumar preferred the appeal No, 104 of 69 on 13-2-69. He applied for certified copies of the judgment and decree on 20-12-68 4-1-69 20-12-68 4-1-69 was fixed for the delivery of the copies. On that date, according to the contention on behalf of the appellant Mr. Rikhab Chand Jain his advocate was present. The copies were not ready. No next date was fixed for delivery of the copies. Copies were ready on 28-1-69. As the defendant or his counsel had no notice, he obtained the copies on 12-2-69, and presented the appeal on 13-2-69 Along with the memo of appeal the appellant submitted an application und...
K.K. Pandey Vs. Narpat Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-03-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1640; 1972()WLN980
ORDERL.S. Mehta, J.1. This is a reference, submitted by learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, recommending that the order for the issue of process against the petitioner, K. K. Pandey, for the offence under Section 477, I. P. C, be quashed.2. Narpat Singh Deora, it is alleged, made a complaint to the Court of Munsiff-Magistrate, Khetri, on October 5, 1971, to the effect that the complainant had been working as U. D. C, in the Administration Wing of Khetri Copper Project since January, 1969. K. K. Pandey was working as Personnel Manager there. In the aforesaid Project the post of Estate Supervisor fell vacant. Applications from prospective candidates for the post were invited by K. K. Pandey from the employees of the Corporation. In pursuance of the above invitation the complainant submitted an application. A scrutiny of the applications was made by the Assistant Personnel Officer (Recruitment) and after a searching look he recommended the name of the complainant along with one more candid...
Agrawal Engineering and Construction Co. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-02-1972
Reported in: [1973]31STC92(Raj); 1972()WLN890
B.P. Beri J.1. On the direction of this court dated 27th August, 1968, the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan has referred the following question for our answer under Section 15(2) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') :Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case and on the true construction of the provisions of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, the petitioner's firm is covered by the definition of a 'dealer' under Section 2(f) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 19542. Messrs. Agrawal Engineering and Construction Company, Jaipur Road, Ajmer, is a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act. It was asked by the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, 'B' Ward, Ajmer, to get itself registered as a dealer under Section 6 of the Act but the petitioner contested the position saying that it was not covered by the definition of the word 'dealer' as defined in Section 2(f) and, therefore, it was not liable to get itself registered. The Assistant Commercia...
Om Prakash Vs. Smt. Chand Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-02-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN878
J.P. Jain, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendant and it arises out of a suit instituted by the respondent Smt. Chand Devi for the eviction of the appellant from the suit property and for arrears of rent.2. Smt. Chand Devi purchased a building bearing AMC No. 16/394 situated near Madar Gate Ajmer on 16-11-1962. The suit property forms part of this building and consists of one shop, three Kothries in the ground floor and two tinsheds on the first floor. Admittedly, Om Prakash was the tenant of the previous owner and he attorned to Smt. Chand Devi as his landlady. He paid rent upto 31-5-65 at the rate of Rs. 21/- per menses. Plaintiff Smt. Chand Devi sought eviction of the defendant Om Prakash on the ground that she required the shop and the residential portion for use and occupation of herself and the members of her family. Inspite of notice and the tenancy having been determined, the defendant tenant did not surrender possession. Accordingly, on 17-7-1965 she instituted the suit...
Tarachand and ors. Vs. Kesrimal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Raj123
Kan Singh, J. 1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Sirohi dated 28-4-1969 dis-missing the plaintiffs' suit for recovery of money on the foot of a mortgage. It raises the question about the validity of the attestation on the mortgage deed as also regarding the mode of proving the execution of the mortgage deed. 2. Plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 were father and son respectively. Deceased Pratap Chand was appellant Tara Chand's father. According to the plaintiffs, de-fendant No. 1 Kesrimal acting for himself and for and on behalf of his minor eons defendants Nos. 2 to 5 executed & mortgage deed for a sum of Rs. 12,000/- on 23-7-1954 in favour of the plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 and Tara Chand's father Pratap Chand. The mortgage deed was got registered the same day. According to it, a house and a shop described in para 1(b) of the plaint were mortgaged and the possession of the mortgaged property was handed over to the mortg...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »