Rajasthan Court July 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.
Dr. (Smt.) Snehlata Mathur Vs. Mahendra Narain
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Raj64
Sidhu, J.1. This is a D. B. Special Appeal by Snehlata from the order, dated November 29, 1978, made by Kasliwal J. in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 104 of 1978, affirming the order, dated, March 30, 1978, made by the District Judge, Jaipur City in Guardianship Case No. 46 of 1976, allowing the application of Mahendra Narain under Section 10, Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (for short, the Act of 1890) and consequently appointing Mahendra Narain as guardian of his minor daughter Mona, and directing the return of Mona to his custody.2. The facts which are not in dispute may be shortly stated here. Mahendra Narain and Snehlata, the contesting parties, were married according to Hindu rites on January 19, 1971. Their relations became strained soon after the marriage. A female child, named Mona, was born in the wedlock on January 26, 1972. The husband obtained dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce on March 9, 1978. Earlier in 1972, the wife had made an application under Section 552 of t...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Foreign Import and Export Association
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1979
Reported in: [1980]45STC265(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. These four reference applications have been filed in this Court under Section 15(3A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, seeking a direction to the Board of Revenue to state the case and refer a question of law arising out of the order of the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer dated 28th February, 1977, to this Court for its opinion.2. The circumstances which have given rise to these reference applications may be briefly stated. M/s. Foreign Import and Export Association, Kota (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'), was engaged in the business of dyeing raw wool and is a registered dealer under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Central Act'). The assessee was permitted to purchase materials used for dyeing raw wool on C forms. The Commercial Taxes Officer, Circle A, Kota, who is the assessing authority in respect of the assessee (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing a...
The Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Ramesh Leather Stores and a ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1979
Reported in: [1982]49STC79(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. This application for making a reference has been filed by the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Ward II, Circle D, Jaipur, under Section 15(3A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and arises in the following circumstances:M/s. Ramesh Leather Stores, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'), is a registered dealer and the applicant, Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Ward II, Circle D, Jaipur, is the assessing authority in respect of the assessee. While making the assessment of the turnover of the assessee for the assessment year 1971-72, pertaining to the period from 1st April, 1971, to 15th February, 1972, the assessing authority levied tax on the turnover of leather board sheets worth Rs. 61,633.79 at the rate of 10 per cent. In making the aforesaid order, the view of the assessing authority was that the goods in which the assessee was dealing, namely, leather board sheets, fell under entry 36 pertaining to all...
Keshav Puri Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN393
ORDERNo. 29/39/65 - AIS (II). In pursuance of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (3) of Rule 16 of the AH India Services (Death cum Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958, the President, in consultation with the Government of Rajasthan is pleased to order the retirement of Shri Keshav Puri, who attained the age of 55 years on 5th February, 1966, from the Indian Administrative Service in the public interest on the expiry of three months notice served on him with the approval of the Central Government in the order No P. 1 (137) Appits (A) 51 dated 5th November, 1965 of the Government of Rajasthan.By Order of the PresidentSd: (P.K. Dave)Joint Secretary to the Government of India. New Delhi, the 28th February, 1967ToShri Keshav Puri.It is this order Ex. 7 which was challenge by Shri Keshav Puri by the writ petition on the following three grounds:(i) That it is violative of the mandatory provisions contained in Rule 16(3) of the Rules, because no previous notice as required by law was given by the ...
indra and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-02-1979
Reported in: [1980]122ITR510(Raj); 1979()WLN266
Lodha, C.J. 1. These are two connected writ petitions which can be conveniently disposed of by a single order. The petitioner in both the cases is the same, i.e., Messrs. Indra and Company, a registered firm carrying on business in iron and steel. Writ petition No. 791 of 1973 pertains to the assessment year 1962-63 whereas Writ Petition No. 1392 of 1973 is with respect to the assessment year 1960-61. The ITO imposed penalty on the petitioner for both the years for not filing the return within time.2. We may take up the facts of Writ Petition No. 791 of 1973. The assessee did not file the return of its income for the assessment year 1961-62 within the time specified in the notice under section 22(1) of the Indian I.T. Act of 1922. A notice was accordingly served on it, under section 22(2) on May, 1961. It should have filed the return by July 4, 1961, but it actually filed it on December 28, 1962, after a delay of more than 17 months. The assessment was completed on April 19, 1963, and ...
Kishan Gopal Vs. Smt. Sarswati
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-02-1979
Reported in: 1979WLN555
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This is an appeal by the husband under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act No. XXV of 55for short, 'the Act' hereafter against the judgment dated April 28, 1978 of the learned District Judge, Bikaner, by which his petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13(1) of the Act was dismissed. For the sake of convenience, the husband appellant and the wife respondent wail hereafter be referred to as 'the husband' and 'the wife' respectively in this judgment.2. The case of the husband, as disclosed in the petition, is as follows-that the husband was married with the wife about ten years preceding the date of the filling of the petition (petition was filed on 1-7-1977) according to the Hindu rites; that a girl was first born out of this wedlock that the husband reliably learnt that the wife was pregnant; that the husband and the wife had not shared common bed for the last 9 1/2 months preceding the date of the presentation of the petition th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›