Rajasthan Court February 1980 Judgments
Chandan Mal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)137
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. In these six writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the notices of demand and the proceedings for recovery of the said demands in respect of the licenses for retail sale of Country Liquor issued in their favour. As these writ petitions raise common questions they are disposed of by a common order.2. The retail sale of Country Liquor in the State of Rajasthan is regulated by the provisions of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') wherein, it is laid down that no excisable article shall be sold except in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence granted in that behalf and provision is made with regard to grant of licence In exercise of the powars conferred by the Act, the State Government h's framed the Rajasthan Excise Rules 1965 (hereinafter referred at the Rules'). The Rules prescribe the various modes by which licences may be granted. One of the mo...
Tag this Judgment!Kishori Lal and 91 ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)379
G.M. Lodha, J.1. The nationalisation of the Bus Transport have always flooded the writ jurisdiction, commencing from Motilal's case of Uttar Pradesh, which ultimately sparked off constitutional debate leading to constitutional amendment; but the end of which is not yet in sight after 3 decides of legal battles. The constitutional umbrella of inclusion of the Motor Vehicles Act in 9th Schedule of the Constitution also proved insufficient to provide immunity from judicial review of schemes of nationalisation under the Act. Every fresh theme of Nationalisation, invariably leads to opening of fresh legale battle fronts, as the war of nationalisation is unending and every expanding, the basic reason being it is primarily a 'Socio Economic' issue and the law comes at the tail end. affulent and resourceful bus operators of Alwar District not satisfied with the 'judicial review' of this Court in Premchand Vyas and other operators (Bench of 9) cases judgment, have revived the same legal debate ...
Tag this Judgment!Hukmi Chand Vs. Jaipur Ice and Oil Mills Co. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Raj155; 1980()WLN200
Mahendra Bhushan, J. 1. This is a defendant's Special Appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated December 9, 1969, and arises out of a suit for injunction.2. The Jaipur Ice and Oil Mills Co., (hereinafter referred to as the Company) was ordinarily composed of six partners, viz., Kishanlal, Mahadeo Prasad, Satya Narayan, Kalicharan, Bishambhar Dass and Jeewan Prasad, and a partnership deed was executed on Feb. 28, 1947. It started manufacturing Ice, Oil and Soap in Bani Park, Jaipur. Two of its partners, Bishambar Dass and Jiwan Prasad left the firm on April 27, 1949, and the rest of the four partners, above named, continued the partnership business up to March 31, 1958, on which date the firm was dissolved under a dissolution deed (Ex. 2). The firm had acquired a plot of land No. 1-VII measuring 260' x 325' at Bani Park. Jaipur, on a part of which the factory had been constructed, and a residential house on a pie...
Tag this Judgment!Umaid Charitable Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1980
Reported in: (1980)15CTR(Raj)317; [1980]125ITR55(Raj); 1980(13)WLN311
Lodha, C.J.1. By this order we propose to dispose of two Income-tax References Nos. 14 of 1975 and 29 of 1976 as well as four applications under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Both the references have been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, at the request of the assessee, Umaid Charitable Trust, Pali-Marwar. Reference No. 14 of 1975 pertains to the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 and Reference No. 29 of 1976 is with regard to the assessment year 1970-71. The question of law referred to us in Reference No. 14 of 1975 reads thus :' Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and also in view of the certificate granted by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the income of M/s. Umaid Charitable Trust, Pali was entitled to exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Section 2(15) of the same Act for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 an...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Mangal Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN305
C.M. Lodha, C.J.1. This is a special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance against the order of the learned Single Judge dated December 6, 1979, where by the learned Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent Mangal Singh and quashed the order of the Assistant Engineer (Civil) Ground Water Department, Jodhpur, August 12, 1974 (Annexure 'H ) by which the respondent's services as mason were terminated with effect from September 11, 1974.2. The respondent was appointed as a mason in the Ground Water Department by the Executive Engineer (Famine), Rajasthan Ground Water Department, Jodhpur by his order dated August 14, 1979 (Annexure 1). wherein it was provided that he was being appointed for one month or till the famine operations are over. However, his services were continued the impugned order of termination was passed. It appears that the respondent had availed of leave even though there was no leave to his credit. The respondent's case is that he ha...
Tag this Judgment!Bhurilal Vs. Smt. Shobhabai
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Raj14; 1980()WLN357
ORDERM.C. Jain, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Udaipur, dated 21-7-1978, whereby the plaintiff's appeal was allowed, judgment and decree of the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Udaipur, dated 25-4-77 was set aside and the plaintiff's suit for recovery of money was decreed. 2. Briefly, the facts are that Smt. Shobhabai instituted a suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,000 principal amount and Rs. 75 interest, total Rs. l,075 with the allegations that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,500 from the plaintiff's husband Gangaram on 2-1-1973, on interest and executed the document Ex. 1. The defendant, thereafter, paid a sum ofRs. 500 and interest for two months. She stated that she is the sole heir of her husband. The suit was resisted by the defendant and it was pleaded by him that the money was paid back to Gangaram. An issue relating to plea of repayment was struck as issue No. 2. After recording the eviden...
Tag this Judgment!Jameel Vs. Gul Mohammad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Raj166; 1980()WLN555
ORDERP.D. Kudal, J.1. This election petition has been filed by an elector against the returned candidate Shri Gul Mohammad respondent No. 1. The petitioner claims himself to be an elector of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly Constituency No. 42 (Johri Bazar, Jaipur) and, thus, claims himself to be entitled to file the petition. The election to the Johri Bazar Rajasthan Legislative Assembly Constituency No. 42, Jaipur was held on 13th June, 1977, and the result was declared on 14th June, 1977.2. The Janata Party applied for the symbol of 'Haldhar within wheel' as the official symbol of the Janata Party. This symbol was allotted by the Election Commission to the Janata Party. The nomination could be filed within 11/5/1977 to 18/5/1977. The withdrawals could be made up to 3 p.m. on 21-5-1977. Originally, the Janata Party decided to adopt Gul Mohammad, respondent No. 1, as its official candidate from the Johari Bazar Constituency No. 42. A communication was sent to the Election Commission...
Tag this Judgment!Brig. B. Lall Vs. Wealth-tax Officer, A-ward and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-1980
Reported in: (1980)15CTR(Raj)180; [1981]127ITR308(Raj)
G.M. Lodha, J.1. Evasion, avoidance or tax dodging has always posed a perennial problem for the revenue. The Direct Taxation Enquiry Committee, headed by Chief Justice K. N. Wanchoo, suggested latest ways andmethods, to plug loopholes of law for removing the above. Section 16A of the W.T. Act was precisely introduced in the Amendments of 1972 for counteracting the evasion of tax by undervaluation of wealth. An alleged evaluation of the working of this section by the alleged absence of its proper use during assessment and reassessment has itself been alleged to have resulted in undervaluation of the provision itself. Its use as a weapon for reopening under Section 17 has resulted in this litigation; the assessee's contention being that this is a misuse of Section 16A by the revenue and beyond jurisdiction. This bunch of 11 writ petitions are aimed at closing the deep openings in Section 16A by reopening notices of Section 17 and further penetrating the very existence of jurisdictional f...
Tag this Judgment!Bothlal and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-26-1980
Reported in: 1980WLN(UC)62
S.N. Deedwania, J1. This petition under Section 482, Cr P.C. is against the order dated October 26, 1978 of the learned Sessions judge Pratapgarh, whereby certain objections of the petitioners as to the legality of their commitment were overruled.2. Briefly, stated the facts relevant for disposal of this petition are these. On 5-7-77, in the morning Mohanlal and Bothlal along with seven other persons went to the field of Heeralal and picked up a quarrel. They gave a beating to Heeralal and his wife Mst. Geetabai. Heeralal succumed to his injuries. A case under Section 302 and 307, IPC was registered. The police filed a chargesheet against Prabhulal, Davaram, Ratanlal, Ramlal, Geu(sic)ilal, Bhanwarlal, Mathuralal, Shivlal and Sohanlal for the aforesaid offences. The police, however, did not challan petitioners Bothlal, Mohanlal and Heeralal. Uda complainant felt aggrieved and filed a petition against all the accused including the three petitioners. Learned Magistrate on this protest pet...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Wazir Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-25-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Raj252; 1980()WLN353
Lodha, C.J. 1. This is a special appeal, by certificate, under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, from the judgment and decree dated October 5, 1967, by a learned single Judge in Section B. Civil Regular Second Appeal No. 108 of 1962; (Reported in AIR 1968 Raj 224) whereby the learned Judge allowed the appeal filed by plaintiff Wazir Singh and decreed the plaintiff's suit for Rs. 2.164/-, with interest pendentelite and future interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum.2. Two preliminary objections have been raised on behalf of the plainliff-respondent to the maintainability of the appeal, and since it is not necessary to narrate the facts giving rise to the appeal for the disposal of the preliminary objections, we proceed straight to state the preliminary objections,3. The first preliminary objection, raised by the learned counsel for the respondent, is that the certificate granted by the learned single Judge was incompetent inasmuch as leave has been granted after the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »