Rajasthan Court January 1984 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.
Dungar Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-06-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN130
S.S. Byas, J.1. By His Judgment Dated 28th October, 1878 The Learned Sessions Judge. Dungarpur convicted accused Dungar under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of the payment of fine to further undergo two months' like imprisonment. The accused has come up in appeal to challenge his conviction and sentence.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case, which is short and simple, is that deceased victim Gautam was the real brother of the accused PW 1 Dhula is their father while PW 2 Smt Leela is their mother and PW 3 Smt. Kesar is their sister. Accused Dungar was living in separate premises of the joint house and was also cooking food separately. It is alleged that there was dispute between the deceased victim and the accused over the shares of the property of joint family. In the night between 3rd and 4th May, 197(sic)6, PW 1 Dhula, PW 2 Leela and PW 3 Mst. Kesar were sleeping on separate cots. The accused was also sleeping on a c...
Chatur Bhuj Pokar Ram Vs. the Commercial Taxes Officer
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-1984
Reported in: [1984]56STC75(Raj)
ORDERPradyot Kumar Banerjee, C.J.1. In this rule the petitioners have challenged the notice given by the authorities under the Central Sales Tax Act as well as under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act. under Section 10 read with Section 5CC of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and also Section 10A read with Section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act for imposition of penalty for non-user of the goods purchased by the petitioners on the basis of certain forms, namely, 17A declaration form under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and form C under the Central Sales Tax Act, and the goods so purchased were used for the purpose of job-work and not for the purpose of manufacture or the petitioners themselves. Whatever was there at the time of issue of the rule, but this point was no longer open for consideration in view of the Supreme Court judgment reported in Assessing Authority-cum-Excise and Taxation Officer, Gurgaon v. East India Cotton Manufacturing Company Limited [1981] 48 STC 239 (SC). In the said ju...
Dr. Suresh Chandra JaIn and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)21
S.S. Vyas, J.1. These two revisions are directed against an order of the learned Judicial Magistrate (3), Jodhpur dated May 30, 1983 by which cognizance for an offence under Section 352, IPC was taken on a private complaint and the accused was summoned to face trial. Since the revisions arise out of one and the same order, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment.2. The grievance of the complainant is that cognizance for offences under Sections 323 and 504, IPC should have also been taken whereas the contention of the accused is that no cognizince of offence could be taken against him without the previous sanction of the State Government under Section 197 Cr. P.C.3. It would be proper to briefly recapitulate the facts giving rise to these revision petitions.4. On 22-1-1982, the complainant Dhanpatmal presented a complaint in the court-below for offences under Sections 323 and 504, IPC. It was alleged that Smt. Hansarani, who was the wife of the son of his broth...
Shrilal Janva Vs. Udai Ram Dhakad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-04-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)434
S.K. Lodha, J.1. This is a petition under 80 and 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (No. XLIII of 1951)(for short 'the Act' herein) filed by Shri Shrilal Janva, challenging the election of respondent Shri Udai Ram Dhakad to Rajasthan Legislative Assembly from Badi Sadri Constituency.2. The result of the election was declared on June 1, 1980 and the respondent was declared elected as having secured the highest number of votes Petitioner Shrilal Janva has questioned the election of the respondent on the ground that the Returning Officer of Badi Sadri Constituency wrongly rejected his (petitioner's) nomination paper. The petitioner has prayed that the election of the respondent may be declared void.3. A Notification under Section 15 of the Act calling the electors of Badi Sadri Constituency to elect a representative, was issued. The Election Commissioner of India, by Notification dated April 27, 1980. issued a programme of election. According to that, the nomination papers w...
J.P. Sharma and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1984
Reported in: [1985]151ITR138(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, has referred the following two questions to this court for its opinion, by its order dated June 30, 1973 :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the notices issued to the assessee under Sections 273 and 271(1)(a) at the time of assessment whose further proceedings were stayed on the request of the assessee were valid notices when no subsequent opportunity was allowed to the assessee of being heard before imposition of the penalties ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ?' 2. The assessee is a registered firm and its return of income for the assessment year 1959-60 was due on January 20, 1960, in accordance with a notice under Section 22(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the ' 1922 Act '), which was in force at the relevant time. The assesse...
Bal Kishan and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ308; 1984()WLN36
ORDERS.S. Byas, J.1. This revision is directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra dated June 4, 1981 passed in an appeal under Section 454, Cr. P. C. relating to the; delivery of the property.2. Very few facts need narration, for the disposal of this revision. Kamraj, who is respondent No. 2 in this proceeding, lodged a written report on 17-8-75 at Police Station, Malotra stating therein that in his absence, unknown miscreants ransacked the house situate in his town Pachpadara and decamped with gold and silver ornaments and other properties of huge value running in several thousands of rupees. The police took up the investigation and rounded up the burglars with their aids. The major portion of the stolen properties in original and in converted shape were recovered in consequence of the informations furnished by the culprists whilst under police custody. On the completion of investigation, the police presented a charge-sheet against six persons including the revisi...
Daya Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)1
D.L. Mehta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Bhilwara dated January 29, 1980 in Nessions Case No. 57 of 1978 convicting the appellants Daya Ram, Nanu. Kalyan and Onkar under Section 147, 447, 323, 149 and 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and convicting the appellant, Khumana under Section 148, 457, 322 read with Section 149 302 and 149 I.P.C.2. The prosecution story unfolded during the trial is that deceased Suraj mal purchased field Nos. 646 and 647 situate in village Gandpura from Godu son of Kalyan for a sum of Rs. 2, 400/-vide registered sale-deed. It has also been urged by the prosecution that deceased Suraj Mal, who was cultivating the land, was in possession of the field at the relvant time. It his further been contended by the prosecution that the accused-appellants and nine others committed the criminal trespass with an intention to dispossess the deceased Suraj mal from the field. It has further been urged that all the accused person & ...
Mahendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)70
S.S. Byas, J.1. This application has been filed by Mahendra Kumar under Section 482 read with Sections 397 and 401, Cr. PC for quashing the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chittorsgarh dated October 7, 1982 passed under Section 319 Cr. PC summoning the petitioner to face trial for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467 and 471/120, IPC. The police submitted a challan against Bhanwarlal and Basantkumar for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467 and 471, IPC.2. Briefly stated the case set up by the prosecution is that they prepared a forged registration certificate of a Primer Safari Saloon purporting to have been issued by the District Transport Officer, Chittorgarh The vehicle was allotted Regisiration No. R.J.H. 1224 under the forged certificate of registration. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, after hearing the prosecution and the accused-persons, passed an order on June 16, 1977 by which accused Bhanwarlal was discharged. The case thereafter lingered ...
Ummaida Ram anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-03-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN27
S.S. Vyas, J.1. By these petitions, the petitioners challenge validity of action commenced against them under the Rajasthan Control of Goondas Act, 1975 (herein after referred to as 'the Act'). They were initially filed under Section 482, Cr.PC but were subsequently treated as writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. Since, both the petitions are based on identical grounds, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment.2. In order to properly appreciate the contentions involved, the facts and circumstances leading to the petitions may briefly be narrated.3. One Girdharilal lal of village Punarasar District Churu filed an application on November 11, 1982 before the District Magistrate, Churu to initiate the proceedings under Section 3 of the Act against the petitioners. It was alleged therein that the petitioners were habitual in intimidation of law abiding citizens by acts of violence or by show of force. They were involved in various criminal cases und...
Maharajadhiraj Himmat Singhji Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-02-1984
Reported in: (1984)38CTR(Raj)342; [1984]150ITR416(Raj)
Lodha, J. 1. This reference has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, and is a joint reference in the matter of wealth-tax as well as income-tax assessments of the assessee, Maharajadhiraj Himmat Singhji. The relevant year for the wealth-tax is 1957-58, and for the income-tax matters, 1961-62 to 1965-66.2. The facts giving rise to this reference briefly stated are that the asses-see, Maharajadhiraj Himmat Singhji is the second son of late Maharaja Shri Ummed Singh, the then Ruler of the erstwhile Jodhpur State. On the death of Maharaja Shri Ummed Singh, his eldest son, the late Maharaja Shri Hanuwant Singh succeeded to the Jodhpur State. Maharaja Hanuwant Singh had four brothers including the present assessee. He gave jagirs and residential accommodations to his four brothers as their 'chhut bhai bunt' and the assessee received 17 villages and a residential house in Jodhpur. The assessee is governed by the Hindu Mitakshara law and by custom as well as the Marwar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »