Rajasthan Court January 1980 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.
Manager, Podar Spinning Mills Vs. the Labour Court of Rajasthan and an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-25-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN115
M.L. Shrimal, J.1. M/s. Podar Spinning Mills, Jaipur (hereinafter called 'the petitioner') is an industrial establishment within the meaning of the provisions embodied in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (to be referred to hereinafter as 'the Act'). Respondent No. 2, Nizamuddin, son of Shri Sabuddin was an employee of the petitioner. A charge-sheet, dated March 17, 1976, was served upon the respondent No. 2. The reply sent by him was received by the Management on March 19, 1976. In the opinion of the Management the reply furnished by the respondent No. 2 was not satisfactory. Accordingly a notice, intimating that an enquiry would be conducted in the matter was issued to non-petitioner No. 2, on March 20, 1976. It is alleged that though this notice had been served personally on the non-petitioner No. 2, he failed to appear on the due date, fixed for the purpose of enquiry.2. The enquiry officer directed the Management to give one more opportunity to the workman in the interest of justi...
Shiv Bus Service Vs. the Rta Jodhpur and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-25-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN403
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution by which, the petitioner seeks to quash the Resolution (Annexure P 9) of the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur dated November 2, 1979 granting one temporary permit each in favour of Ravindra Singh (respondent No. 2) and Dalpatsingh (respondent No. 3) on Bagra-Sumerpur route. The petitioner has filed copies of the temporary permits marked as Annexures P-10 and P-ll dated November 13, 1979, which were granted to respondents No. 2 and 3 respectively.2. The petitioner is an existing operator of Sumerpur to Jawai viz. Joyla, Kosaliya, Athavada, Bhev, Vagin, Sugaliya, Andore, Gole route which was subsequently extended upto Mandwaris and holds one non-temporary stage carriage permit (Annexure P-1), valid upto February 27, 1980, He was also granted one non temporary stage carriage permit for the routes Sumerper to Jawai viz Palri Johira, Posali, Athwade, Bhev, Andore. Soparia, Gole & Mandawaria to Bhinmal ...
Purshottam Lal and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1980
Reported in: 1980()WLN184; 1980()WLN321
ORDERMahendra Bhushan, J.1. This is a writ petition, which was initially moved by one Ram Pershad Rajgaria, who died during the pendency of the writ petition, and is now being represented by the legal representatives. It seeks quashing of the order dated October 4, 1971, of the Government of India, Ministry of Steel and Mines, Department of Mines, passed under Rule 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).2. The question involved in this writ petition is, as to whether the State Government has a right to reserve the mineral for exploitation by itself or for any other purpose. To decide this controversy, the facts need be stated so far as they are relevant for the present purposes. They are as follows.3. Laxmi Narain Pandey (respondent 3) made an application on 2-1-1967, for the grant of prospecting licence in respect of 640 Acres or one square mile out of the area situated near villages Karowali, Piplawa, Naraina and Bhakharia, situated in Tehsil...
The Incon (India) Ltd. Vs. A.L. Rungta and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-24-1980
Reported in: 1981CriLJ144; 1980()WLN156
ORDERP.D. Kudal, J.1. The petitioners have filed this application for contempt of this Court's order dated 30-1-1979.2. The brief facts of the case which are relevant for the disposal of this contempt petition are that the shareholders of M/s. Incon (India) Ltd. filed a petition for winding up the Incon (India) Ltd. under Section 439 read with Section 433(f) of the Companies Act, 1956. This petition was admitted for hearing on 9-3-1978. An application was moved on behalf of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation, Jaipur that the Corporation may be allowed to intervene, and that the petition for winding up may be dismissed with costs. It was, inter alia, pleaded by the Rajasthan Financial Corporation that the assets of Incon (India) Ltd., Jaipur have been taken over by the Rajasthan Financial Corporation in exercise of the powers vested in the Corporation under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951. It was further contended that in view of Section 29(5), the Corporation i...
B.R. Oil Mills, Bharatpur Vs. Assistant Engineer (D) R.S.E.B., Bharatp ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Raj108; 1980()WLN149
ORDERMahendra Bhushan, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus or a direction or order with a prayer that the order of the respondents (Annexure-1) repeated in Annexure-5 be quashed and the non-petitioner (1) be restrained by a rule of this Court from executing the order (An-nexure-3) of non-petitioner (2), and further that the non-petitioner be restrained from disconnecting the supply of energy to the petitioner so long as the petitioner makes the payment of electricity charges consumed by him. 2. M/s. B. R. Oil Mills, petitioner, is a registered partnership concern carrying on business at Bharatpur and extracts oil from oil seeds by the machinery fixed in it. The petitioner is a high tension consumer of the non-petitioner (2), and he applied to the non-petitioners for providing the high tension power in the year 1962. The same was provided to the petitioner and the petitioner is regularly paying the amount as per bills for the-el...
Fateh Lal Vs. Sunder Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Raj220; 1980()WLN188
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J. 1. This revision petition has been filed by the defendant Fatehlal, against the order dated 11th July, 1979, passed by the District Judge, Udaipur, in Civil Suit No. 129/1978, filed by respondent Sunderlal, against the petitioner for the recovery of Rs. 21,080/- (Rs. 15,500/-by way of principal amount and Rs. 5580/-on account of interest thereon), on the basis of certain cheques and promissory notes executed by the petitioner in favour of the respondent during the period from 7th October 1973, to 26th May, 1975. The said suit was filed on 16th of October 1978 under Order 37, of Civil P.C. In the suit aforesaid, the respondent has stated that after the execution of the aforesaid cheques and promisory note the petitioner had entered into an agreement on 26th October 1975, whereby he acknowledged the debt payable by him and agreed to pay the said amount in instalments. After the receipt of the notice in the said suit, the petitioner moved an application under Order 3...
Commissioner of Income-tax and Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Thakur U ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-1980
Reported in: (1980)16CTR(Raj)397; [1980]126ITR518(Raj); 1980(13)WLN58
C.M. Lodha, C.J.1. This judgment will dispose of Income-tax Reference No. 20/71 and Wealth-tax Reference No. 18/71, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C'. The assessment years under consideration in the income-tax reference are 1962-63 to 1966-67, whereas those, in wealth-tax reference are 1964-65 to 1966-67.2. There were five reference applications under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, in respect of five assessment years. Similarly, there were three reference applications under Section 27 of the W.T. Act, 1957. The Tribunal consolidated the five reference applications in the income-tax matter and the three reference applications in the wealth-tax matter and has made a consolidated reference in the income-tax as well as wealth-tax matters. The points involved in both the references are identical. The questions referred in both the references are the same which read as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right i...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Radha Ballabh and Sons
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1980
Reported in: [1982]51STC60(Raj); 1980()WLN91
C.M. Lodha, C.J.1. This is an application under Section 15(3A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for directing the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan to state a case and refer the questions of law arising out of its order dated 15th January, 1976, passed by it in special appeal No. 1180/STA/73/ Jaipur.2. The assessment year is 1965-66, relevant period being 4th November, 1964, to 24th October, 1965. Respondent No. 1, Messrs. Radha Ballabh and Sons, Tripolia Bazar, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'), carries on business of buying and selling iron, electric goods, hardware, etc. and is registered under the Act. The petitioner, Commercial Taxes Officer, 'A' Circle, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing authority'), assessed the petitioner (sic) on a taxable turnover of Rs. 18,18,883.08 and also imposed a penalty amounting to Rs. 500 under Section 16(l)(c). Penalty to the tune of Rs. 14,694.72 was also imposed under Section...
Krishna C. Mathur Vs. the University of Jodhpur and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN22
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. Dr. Krishna C. Mathur, the petitioner, in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, is employed as lecturer in the Department of Chemistry in the University of Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'University'). He was appointed on the said post in)July, 1963. Respondents No. 5 to 32 in this writ petition, are employed as Professors and Readers in the various departments of the University. The University has been established under the provisions of the jodhpur University Act. 1962 (hereinafter called the 'Act'. The Act has constituted various authorities, namely, Syndicate, Academic Council etc for the discharge of the various functions entrusted to them under the Act. Under, Section 16 of the Act, the Syndicate is the executive body of the. University whereas under Section 15 of the Act, the Senate is the supreme authority of the University vested with the power to review the acts of Syndicate and the Academic Council and also to exercise al...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Delhi Sanitary Stores
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-18-1980
Reported in: [1981]127ITR822(Raj)
Shrimal, J.1. On an application, dated April 11, 1969, filed by the assessee, M/s. Delhi Sanitary Stores, Jaipur, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question for answer to this court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to grant registration to the assessee for the assessment year 1964-65 '2. The facts giving rise to this reference are that a partnership firm, under the name and style of M/s. Delhi Sanitary Stores, Jaipur, was brought into existence on January 21, 1961, and the partnership deed was executed on April 30, 1961. This partnership comprised of two partners, namely, Rajesh Chand Gupta and Sushil Chand Gupta, having equal shares in the profit and loss of the firm. The above-named firm was assessed as a registered firm for the assessment year 1962-63. By a dissolution deed, dated January 11, 1963, the above-named firm was dissolved with effect from January 1, 1963....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »