Rajasthan Court April 1975 Judgments
Johari Lal Vs. P.C.H. Reddy and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-28-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Raj232; 1975()WLN172
V.P. Tyagi, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur, dated January 28, 1970, whereby the claim of the appellant Johrilal under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, for a sum of Rs. 15,000/-. was dismissed by the said Tribunal. 2. Facts giving rise to this litigation, in a nut-shell, are as follows: Johrilal, appellant, was an employee of Hindustan Aeronautics. On November 2, 1967, he borrowed a scooter rickshaw from Radha Vallabh (P. W. 1) with a view to pay visits to his friends on the occasion of 'Deepawali'. Joharilal himself was driving that scooter rickshaw and he went from Nagauri gate towards the main road which connects Paota to Mandore. When Johrilal reached the junction of Nagauri gate road and the Mandore road he saw an army truck bearing No. B. C. 22229 coming fast from Paota side on the Mandore road. Looking to the speed of the truck Joharilal thought it proper to stop his vehicle on the Nagauri road near...
Tag this Judgment!Ghisa and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-25-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ39
ORDERM.L. Shrimal, J.1. The eleven accused viz. Ghisa Ladu, Lala, Rahima, Alladin, Ramzan, Sohan, Rama, Sua, Mst. Tegi and Mst. Phundi were tried in the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Ajmer in connection with what happened on February 24, 1968 at about 2 pa ra. In the course of that occurrence Mangla, Nainu, Deva and Budha sustained injuries. The accused Ghisa, Ladu and Lala were convicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, under Section 326 Indian Penal Code, each of whom was sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment, and a fine of Rs, 500/- in default of the payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. The accused Rahima was convicted under Section 324, I. P. C, and sentenced to two years' vigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, hi default of the payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two months. The. remaining seven accused were acquitted by the Assistant Sessions Judge. On appeal the le...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Rajasthan Vs. Ram Prashad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Raj102; 1975()WLN197
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This is a State appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Ganganagar, on May 2, 1973, holding the State-defendant liable to pay to the plaintiff-respondent an amount of Rs. 13,115 with an interest @ Rs. 6.00 per cent per annum, which according to the trial court comes to Rs. 1,329. Since the defendant-State had paid during the pendency of the suit an amount of Rs. 10,782, the total amount of decree passed against the defendant-State remains to be Rs. 3,662.2. Facts giving rise to this appeal, are as follows:The plaintiff-respondent entered into a contract with the State Government to supply 9,76,000 bricks of the size of 9'X 4 1/2'X2 3/4' @ Rs. 86 per thousand bricks and a formal contract was executed by the parties, which is Ex. A/1. The case of the plaintiff was that he supplied the bricks to the defendant-State and the same was accepted by the Assistant Engineer, Rajasthan Canal Project, Tilwara Sub-Division, who was incharge of...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bikaner Gypsums Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN975
P.N. Shinghal, C.J.1. The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench 'A') (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) has drawn up the statement of the case and referred the following question of law to this Court under Section 256(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for decision,-Whether on the facts & in the circumstances of the, case the Tribunal was right in holding the payment of Rs. 3 lakhs to the Northern Railway was a revenue expenditure and was a deduction allowable under the Income-tax Act, 1961?-The reference has arisen in these circumstances : The Bikaner Gypsum Ltd, hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee', carries on the business of mining minerals. Its predecessor in title, the Natural Science (India) Ltd, acquired a lease from the Maharaja of the erstwhile Bikaner State on September 29, 1948 ever an area of 427 square miles, at Jamsar. The lease agreement is on the record as Anexure B. The lease was for a period of 20 years and was renew...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Board Through Its Chairman Vs. the State of Rajasthan and or ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN184
ORDERS LETTER FOLLOWS.' The Govt. also forwarded a copy of the representation of the Cloth Merchants Association to the Administrator, Municipal Board, vide its later dated January 25, 1974 Exhibit-15 at page 46 of the Paper Book and asked the Administrator to send factual report of the case for perusal of the Chief Minister. The Administrator, by his letter dated January 28, 1974 (Exhibit 6 at page 27 of the Paper Book) intimated to the Government that while all the arrangements for collection of the tax had been completed, the telegram (Exhibit 2) was received. He further staged that the Board was passing through a financial crisis and its finances could not be put in order without realising the tax. He, therefore, sought the permission of the Government to realise the tax. The Administrator again by his letter dated February 1, 1974 (Exhibit-7) wrote to the Government that the finances of the Municipal Board were so bad that it found be difficult even to pay the salary of the staff ...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Lal Vs. Ramavtar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-18-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)149
J.P. Jain, J.1. This is defendant's second appeal against whom respondents' suit for injunction has been decreed in part by the Munsiff-Magistrate. Behror by his order dated August 9, 197l, and upheld by the Additional Civil Judge, Alwar vide his order dated November 27, 1972.2. Ramavtar, Ram Swaroop and Rama Kant, sons of Nanag Ram instituted a suit against Sayam Lal in the Court Munsiff Behror alleging that they belong to one family, and they have their houses in Mohalla Mishran, village Behror. The property has been shown in Ex. 1 placed on record by the plaintiffs. According to them, 'chowk' shown as 'A' belongs to the plaintiffs, whereas 'chowk' 'B' belongs to the defendant Shyam Lal, and it is demarcated by a stone slab marked 'J'. It has further been alleged that 'chabutra' 'C' falls within the 'chowk' 'A, and it belongs to the plaintiffs, and their ancestors. According to them, to the east of this chabatra' is the defendant's house, and there is spout Z', which falls on the 'ch...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanwar Lal and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN227
Kalyan Dutta Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk, in Sessions Case No. 1 of 1970, convicting Rama, Bhawna, Birdha and Jagdish appellants under Sections 147, 325/149, 323 and 323/149, I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of floe to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 15 days on the first count; on the second to undergo four months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. No sentence was awarded to each of these appellants under sec ions Section 323 and 323 read with Section 149 I.P.C. Both the sentences of imprisonment under Sections 147 and 325/149, IPC. were ordered to run concurrently. The Additional Sessions Judge convicted Ranjeeta and Bhanwar Lal appellants also under Sections 147, 325 and 325/149, 323, and 323/149, I.P....
Tag this Judgment!Ghisa and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN213
M.L. Shrimal, J.1. The eleven accused viz. Ghisa, Ladu, Lala, Rahima, Alladin, Ramzan, Sohan, Rama, Sua, Mst. Tega and Mst. Phundi were tried in the Court of Assistant Sessions judge, Ajmer in connection with what had period on February 24, 1968 at about 2 p.m. In the course of that occurrence Mangla, Nainu, Deva and Budha sustained injuries. The accused Ghisa Ladu & Lala were convicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, under Section 326 Indian Penal Code, each of whom was sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- to default of the payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. The accused Rahima was convicted under Section 324 I.P.C., and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of the payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two months. The remaining seven accused were acquitted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, On appeal the learned Additio...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhaiya Lal Vs. Hari Narayan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)244
J.P. Jain, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by respondent Hari Narayan to enforce his right of pre-emption on the ground that he is a co-sharer in the subject of sale in the Court of Civil Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur, on 26th March, 1960 The respondent's suit having been decreed by the trial Court on 30th of May, 1964, and confirmed in appeal by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City, the defendant Kanhaiya Lal has assailed that decree on the ground that the respondent's suit was time barred. The subject matter of this controversy is covered by issue No. 4 framed by the trial court and it reads as under:Whether the defendants came to know about the sale deed Ex A/1 first of all on 25-1-60 and thus the suit is within limitationThe facts which are not in dispute are that Mst. Suja sold her part of the property to Kanhaiya Lal by registered sale deed dated 5-12-56 for Rs. 6499/-. The plaintiff Hari Narayan is admittedly co-sharer in the property. According to him ...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Engnieer R.C.P. Central Workshop Division (State of Rajastha ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-14-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN151
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award given by the Commissioner appointed under the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 in employed in the Rajasthan Canal Project and working on the relevant date as a driver on a jeep which was attached to the Medical Officer of the Project appointed in a dispensary at Suratgarh.2. On 4th of May, 1968, Gurcharan Singh when he was on duty fulfill. He was removed to his house where he died at about 2.3.p.m. His widow Smt. Vera filed a claim in the court of the Rajasthan Workmens Compensation Commissioner for an amount of Rs. 8,000/- alleging that her husband Gurcharan Singh who was a workmen under the provisions of the Act suddenly collapsed while perform in his duty and instantaneously died and, therefore, she was entitled to receive a compensation of Rs. 8000/-.3. This claim was contested by the State Government through the Executive Engineer of the Rajasthan Canal Project mainly on the ground that the workman died a natural death Acco...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »