Rajasthan Court February 1972 Judgments
State of Rajasthan Vs. Mohanlal Ratanlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1972
Reported in: [1973]30STC148(Raj); 1972()WLN141
Jagat Narayan, C.J.1. The following question has been referred to this court for decision by the Board of Revenue under Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act:Whether in regard to the year 1961-62 the provision of Rule 25C, Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, was only directory and not mandatory and whether it was not necessary to obtain declaration form for goods which had been sold to registered dealers for the purpose of resale within the State.2. The facts which have given rise to the reference are these : The assessee, who is a registered dealer, claimed a deduction from his taxable turnover under Section 2(s)(iv) amounting to Rs. 6,397.99. Sales to registered dealers were supported by declarations in form S.T. 17 to the extent of Rs. 2,308.33 before the assessing authority. Deduction to that extent was allowed under Rule 25C of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules. Deduction to the extent of Rs. 4,089.66 was refused.3. The assessee appealed to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Tax...
Tag this Judgment!Brij Kishore Vs. Ram Niwas
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN89
R.D. Gattani, J.1. The last general elections to the Municipal Board, Kekri took place on 25-10-1970 and the result was declared on 26-10-1970. Respondents Ram Niwas and Jagdish Chandra, appellant Brij Kishore and one Padam Chand, who later on withdrew from the election, filed their nomination papers in respect of Ward No. 2. Scrutiny of the nomination papers took place on 30-9-1970 and on an objection being taken by the appellant Shri Brij Kishore Sharma in respect of respondent Ram Niwas, his nomination paper was rejected under Section 26 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act {hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') The result was that only two candidates viz., Brij Kishore Sharma and Jagdish Chandra remained in the field and as a result of the polls Brij Kishore Sharma was declared elected.2. Aggrieved by the alleged improper rejection of the nomination paper of Shri Ram Niwas, two election petitions were filed: one by Shri Ram Niwas himself, who is respondent in both the appeals No. 10...
Tag this Judgment!Shashi Kant Vs. the Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-08-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Raj6; 1972()WLN97
Jagat Narayan, C.J. 1. This is a special appeal against the judgment of a learned single Judge dismissing a writ petition filed by the appellant.2. The appellant is an existing operator of Dungarpur Sagwara Galiyakot route. The Regional Transport Authority granted two permits to the Rajas-than State Road Transport Corporation under Section 68-F (1-A) of the Motor Vehicles Act for a route which completely overlapped the route of the appellant. A representation was filed opposing the grant by the Dungarpur-Sagwara Banswara-Galiyakot Bus Association. Annexure P-5 is that representation. It was signed by the Manager of the Bus Association as well as by two members of the Association namely Bhawani Shankar and the appellant Shashi Kant. Despite the representation two permits were granted to the Raja-sthan State Road Transport Corporation. The appellant filed an appeal before the Transport Appellate Tribunal. It was dismissed on a preliminary objection that the appellant did not deliver a co...
Tag this Judgment!Krishan Chander and ors. Vs. the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan and or ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Raj171; 1972()WLN850
Jagat Narayan, C.J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by the defendants in a suit for partition of agricultural lands and some other reliefs against the judgment of the Board of Revenue.2. The agricultural lands were owned by one Narain the common ancestor of the plaintiffs and the defendants. Narain had 5 sons Onkarlal, Kanhaiya Lal, Moti Lal, Chuni Lal and Chhoga Lal. The branches of Kanhaiya Lal and Chuni Lal have admittedly become extinct. Onkar Lal had two sons Radha Vallabh and Gopi Vallabh. The plaintiffs are the sons of Gopi Vallabh. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are the sons of Radha Vallabh. Defendants Nos. 9 and 6 are sons of Defendant No. 2. Defendant No. 7 is the son of Defendant No. 9. Defendant No. 3 is the son of Moti Lal and Defendant No. 8 is the son of Defendant No. 3. The plaintiffs alleged in the alternative that Gopi Vallabh was adopted by Chhoga Lal's widow Smt. Vedi Devi. If the adoption is proved the share of the plaintiffs would be one-thir...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ram Vs. Prabhu Dayal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-1972
Reported in: AIR1972Raj180; 1972()WLN49
Kan Singh, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal brought against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Alwar, dated 31-8-60 ordering that defendant Shri Bam shall be removed from the office of the Pujari of Shri Daooji's Temple situated in Bazaz Bazar near Zenana Hospital at Alwar and he shall hand over charge of his office to the plaintiffs, the trustees of the temple. The learned District Judge further directed that the possession of the temple and its property marked red in the site plan shall also be delivered by the defendant to the plaintiffs and further plaintiffs shall receive possession of all the articles mentioned in list Ex. 27, except ornaments and Mukuts, from defendant Shri Ram.2. The temple in question is said to be a big one. Its description including the shops and residential apartments attached to it is given in para. 2 of the plaint. According to the plaintiffs, who claimed to be the trustees of this temple appointed in pursuance of a scheme prepared un...
Tag this Judgment!Lallu Singh and anr. Vs. the Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan a ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Raj172; 1972()WLN418
Jagat Narayan, C.J. 1. This is a special appeal by Lallu Singh and Bheru Ram against an order of a learned single Judge of this Court dismissing their writ petition filed against the grant of permits to Shankar Lal and Sahi Ram on Nokha-Panchu-Dharnokh route which completely overlaps their Nokha-Panchu route, they being exising operators on this route.2. Sahi Ram, Shankar Lal and Ganesh Ram applied for grant of permits on the Nokha-Pauchu-Dhamokh route. Lallu Singh and Bheru Ram made a representation to the Regional Transport Authority in writing against the grant of permits on this route. The representation was unsigned. Bheru Ram and Lallu Singh were represented by counsel on the date of hearing before the Regional Transport Authority, but the latter was not heard on the ground that the representation was not signed. Permits were granted to Shankar Lal and Sahi Ram. Bheru Ram and Lallu Singh appealed to the Transport Appellate Tribunal, but the appeal was rejected on the ground that ...
Tag this Judgment!Ganeshilal Gupta Vs. Bharatpur Oil Mills Through Official Liquidator
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN68
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. This is an application of Ganeshilal, one of the ex-Directors Bharatpur Oil Mills (P) Ltd., for relief under Rule 177 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'. An order for the winding up of the Company was made on October 4, 1960, and the petitioner claims the recovery of his remuneration as director for the period May 20, 1957 to January 4, 1960, at the rate of Rs. 400/-per month, amounting to Rs. 12, 600/-, on the strength of two resolutions of the Company dated May 20, 1957 and September 12, 1958. He has stated that after the winding-up order was made he asked the other directors to file a claim on his behalf also because he was not in a position to undertake the journey to Jodhpur on account of his old age and illness, and that be remained under the impression that they had done so. He came to know from one of the ex-directors that the claims of the other three directors were allowed by the Official Liquidator on September 25...
Tag this Judgment!NalIn Kumar Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN85
L.S. Mehta, J.1. On March 17, 1971, at about 2 P.M., Bhagwan Das (P.W. 1), an employee of the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Bayana Branch, lodged first information report with the Police Station, Bayana, alleging therein that very day at about 1-30 P.M 8 persons raided his Bank and decamped with Rs. 16,261. 23 P. and other articles. It was further mentioned in that document that one of the dacoits was Nalin Kumar, a resident of Bayana. Two dacoits had pistols with them. One had a hand grenade. The remaining culprits were armed with knives. All the 8 persons asked the Bank employees, the moment they entered the Bank premises, to stand up and raise their hands other wise they would be killed. Two of the dacoits disconnected the telephone line. Some of the miscreants gave beating to Bhagwan Das and other Bank employees and they were also made to stand near a wall. The dacoits then broke the cash-box and took out the aforesaid amount and other articles. Thereafter all the 8 dacoits ran...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Rajasthan Vs. Ratan Lal Kewal Chand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-01-1972
Reported in: [1972]29STC689(Raj); 1972()WLN99
Jagat Narayan, C.J. 1. The following question has been referred by the Board of Revenue :Whether the turnover of the assessee in respect of the woollen coats was chargeable at the rate prescribed by the Notification No. F.5 (39) E & T/58/1 dated 1st April, 1958, namely 7 per cent, or the same was chargeable at the general rate prescribed by the Act, namely, 3 1/8 per cent 2. Under Notification No. F.21(7)SR/55 dated 25th March, 1955, different rates of sales tax were prescribed for the 3 lists appended to the notification. We are concerned with items 10, 11, 12 and 13 of List II which run as follows :10. Silk including artificial silk and silken goods of all types, velvet and articles made of it including caps.11. All textile fabrics (woollen, cotton or silken), in which gold, silver or gilded metal is used in weaving, knitting and embroidering and wires of gold, silver and gilded metal, zari and other articles used for embroidery.12. All kinds of woollen goods, shawls and woollen clot...
Tag this Judgment!B. Gopal Das and ors. Vs. Kota Straw Board (P) Limited
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-01-1972
Reported in: 1972WLN35
1. The question which has been referred to us for consideration is whether the Court has jurisdiction under Section 536(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, to authorise a disposition of a company's property during the pendency of a winding-up petition notwithstanding that a winding up order has not been made? The reference has become necessary as it has been suggested that the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Ramesh Chandra v. Chopasni Ice, Aerated Water and Oil Mills Ltd. Jodhpur and Ors. requires reconsideration. In that case also a similar question had arisen, but was answered in the negative.2. Section 536 of the Companies Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', occurs in that portion of Chapter V of Part VII which deals with the effect of winding up on antecedent and other transactions. Sub Section (2) of that section provides as follows:536 (2). In the case of a winding up by or subject to the supervision of the Court any disposition of the property (including ac...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›