Rajasthan Court April 1979 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.
Bagru Ram and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)159
K.D. Sharma, J.1. D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 255 of 1973 61ed by Bagru Ram and Sohanlal and D B. Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 1973 preferred by the State of Rajasthan arise out of one and the same judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, dated April 10, 1973, by which Bagru Ram and Sohan Lal sons of Aidan were convicted under Sections 302 and 302/34 IPC respectively and each of them was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months while Rajia, Sohan Lal son of Narain & Nam Raj were given benefit of doubt and were acquitted of all the charges claimed against them.2. The incident that led to the aforcesaid five accused persons may be briefly described as follows:- On May 17, 1971, at about 3 p.m Hari Ram son of Pokhar Ram, deceased, followed by Het Ram and Bhagirath was returning from the house of his father to his own house which is situated towards the bus-stand of vill...
Shiv Kishan Shiv NaraIn Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-20-1979
Reported in: [1980]121ITR168(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J. 1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on behalf of M/s. Shiv Kishan Shiv Narain, Bhawani Mandi, District Jhalawar (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee').2. The facts which are not in controversy between the parties are that the assessee did not file any return under Section 139(1) of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1967-68 within the prescribed time or even within the extended time, which was up to 15th August, 1967. Thereafter, anotice under Section 139(2) of the Act was served upon the assessee by the ITO on March 13, 1968. But even thereafter for a period of more than a year, the assessee did not file any return and the return was actually filed by the assessee on December 23, 1969. The return showed that the assessee had paid a sum of Rs. 18,900 by way of interest to the partners, but the same was not added back by the assessee. The assessee disclosed its income for the relevant ...
Kishan Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-20-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN247
K.D. Sharma, J.1. This is a criminal appeal filed by Kishan Singh against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Udaipur, date February 22, 1973, by which the appellant was convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The incident that led to the arrest and prosecution of the appellant may be briefly described as follows : Ram Singh, deceased, was married to Mst. Dhanni. He used to live with his wife in village Kachwali. He owned & possessed some land which he cultivated He was interested in singing religious songs About ten years before his murder, he went to Ahmedabad for earning his livelihood. From there he used to pay visits to his village once or twice in a year Krshansingh appellant was the disciple of Ram Singh, deceased. In his absence, the appellant was asked by the deceased to cultivate his land. During the absence of the deceased from his village the appellant developed illicit intimacy with Mst. Dhanni, who gave birth loan i...
Hans Raj Etc. Vs. Board of Revenue
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-13-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Raj218; 1979()WLN261
Lodha, C.J. 1. These are three connected writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners in these petitions are brothers end since the main points urged arc common to all of them, we propose to dispose them of by a single order. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of these cases are that 25 Bighas of land situate in 11 S. B. D. was allotted to each of the petitioners in the year 1959 under the provisions of the Rajasthan Temporary Cultivation (Leases Conditions) Act, 1955 and subsequently, on the application by the petitioners, the land inquestion was allotted to the petitioners permanently on December 16, 1972, However, the allotting authority, having come to know that the petitioners had got land allotted in their favour by making incorrect statement of facts, cancelled the allotment on January 8, 1975. Aggrieved by the orders of cancellation, the petitioners filed appeals and the appellate authority, by its order dated December 29, 1976, remanded the case to ...
Baga Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-12-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Raj31
Lodha, C.J. 1. These are two connected special appeals directed against a common order dated Dec. 19, 1978 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the petitioner's writ applications registered as S. B. Civil Writ Peti-tions Nos. 858 and 857 of 1978, were dismissed. The dispute between the parties relates to removal and shifting of outlets of water in Chak Nos. 19 N. W. D. and 20 N. W. D. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 857 of 1978 was in respect of Chak No. 20 N. W. D. whereas S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 858 of 1978 was in respect of Chak No. 19 N. W. D.2. The Divisional Irrigation Officer, Rawatsar, who is also Executive Engineer, Rawatsar (hereinafter referred to as 'D.I. O.'), by his letter dated July 1, 1978 (Ex. 3), submitted his recommendation to the Superintending Irrigation Officer, Hanumangarh Junction, who is also Superintending Engineer (hereinafter referred to as 'Section I. O.'), that the outlet No. 20 N. W. D. may be shifted to stone-line No. 124/10 (running south to n...
Bagaram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-12-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN277
C.M. Lodha, C.J.1. These are two connected special appeals directed against a common order dated December 19, 1978 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the petitioner's writ applications registered as S.B. Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 858 and 857 of 1978, were dismissed. The dispute between the parties relates to removal and shifting of outlets of water in Chak Nos. 19 N.W.D. SB Civil Writ Petition No. 857 of 1978 was in respect of Chak No. 20 NWD whereas SB Civil Writ Petition No. 858 of 1978 was in respect of Chak No. 19 NWD.2. The Divisional Irrigation Officer, Rawatsar, who is also Executive Engineer, Rawatsar (hereinafter referred to as 'D.I.O.'), by his letter dated July 7, 1978 (Ex. 3), submitted his recommendation to the Superintending Irrigation Officer, Hanumangarh Junction, who is also Superintending Engineer (hereinafter referred to as 'S.I.O.'), that the outlet No. 20 NWD may be shifted to stone-line No. 124/10 (running south to north) from stone-line 134/10 (running e...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Motilal Omprakash and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-11-1979
Reported in: [1980]46STC198(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. These two reference applications can conveniently be disposed of together by a common order.2. These matters relate to the assessment of sales tax for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68 of M/s. Motilal Omprakash of Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'). The Reference Application No. 234 of 1975 relates to the assessment year 1967-68 and the demand notice, which is in dispute, is for a sum of Rs. 90.72. The Reference Application No. 235 of 1975 relates to the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1966-67 and the demand notice for that year is for a sum of Rs. 258.90. It appears that, in both these assessment years, the assessee was assessed to sales tax in respect of the sale of iron buckets and ghamlas at the rate of 6 per cent. However, it was, subsequently, discovered that the assessee should have been assessed to tax in respect of the sale of the aforesaid article at the rate of 7 per cent. As such proceedings under Section 12 of t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R.K. Golecha
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1979
Reported in: [1979]118ITR674(Raj)
C.M. Lodha, C.J.1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state the case and refer a question of law arising out of the. Tribunal's order dated September 26, 1974, passed in Income-tax Appeal No. 454/JP/73-74 for the assessment year 1969-70, as the Tribunal had refused to do so by its order dated February 4, 1975, passed in Reference Application No. 195/JP/1974-75.2. The assessee filed the return on December 29, 1970, whereas he was required to file it on or before 30th September, 1969. Thus, there was a delay of 14 months and 28 days. The ITO imposed a penalty of Rs. 7,232 under Section 271(1)(a)(i) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee went in appeal but was unsuccessful. Consequently, he filed a second appeal and, as already stated above, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the assessee was under a bona fide belief that he may not be required to file the return, and further th...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Id Mohammed Nizamuddin
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-03-1979
Reported in: (1979)10CTR(Raj)136; [1979]120ITR660(Raj)
C.M. Lodha, C.J. 1. These are three connected matters which can be conveniently disposed of by a common order. Case No. 64 of 1973 pertains to the assessment year 1963-64, in respect of penal interest for late filing of the return. Case No. 170 of 1973 also pertains to the assessment year 1963-64, but relates to penalty for late filing of the return. Case No. 168 of 1973 pertains to the assessment year 1962-63, in respect of late filing of the return. The assessee's case for these years was that he filed the returns on May 4, 1963, whereas the department's case was that the returns had been filed on October 7, 1966. The ITO in all the cases came to the conclusion that the assessee's contention was incorrect, and, in this view of the matter, he calculated penal interest as well as penalty on the basis that the returns were filed on October 7, 1966.2. Aggrieved by the orders of the ITO the assessee filed an appeal before the AAC. In Case No. 170 of 1973, the AAC dismissed the assessee's ...
Ramsahai Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-03-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN(UC)216
K.S. Sidhu, J.1. The appellant Ram Sahai has been convicted by the learned District Sessions Judge, Gangapur City under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. The case of the prosecution which resulted in the conviction and sentence of the appellant as aforementioned may be shortly stated here. On March 8, 1974 at about 5 30 P.M., Ram Narain son of Chuniya, resident of village Hitrapura, lodged a report with the police post Hitrapura that a little earlier he had caught hold of Ram Sahai accused who was on the run after committing this crime. He told the police that on hearing the shouts raised by Gaindiya (PW 4) and Gangadhar (PW 6), he become alert and saw the accused running near his field. He caught hold of the accused and asked him the reason why he was running. The accused confessed to Ram Narain that he had killed Chhotiya, one of his own friends & that he could take Ramnarain and others to the fields where the dead body who lying. The accused led Ram Narain & ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »