Rajasthan Court May 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.
Sadra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-15-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)88
S.S. Byas, J.1. Accused Sadra was convicted under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi vide judgment dated August 19, 1977. The accused went in appeal which was heard by the learned Additional Session Judge, Sirohi. In appeal, the conviction and sentence of the accused were maintained. The accused has now come up in revision.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the accused was found selling milk in the town of Sirohi on July 26, 1975 by the Food Inspector Shiv Shanker. He suspected the milk to be adulterated. He disclosed his identity to the accused and purchased 660 ml of milk from him after making a payment of 0.70 paise in cash as its price. The milk was divided in three equal parts and each part w...
Nathu Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-15-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN(UC)120
S.S. Byas, J.1. By his judgment dated August 11, 1973 the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi convicted the accused-petitioner Nathu Singh and Swaroop Singh under Sections 323 and 429, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to two months' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/- on first and six months' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/- on second count Both of them went in appeal. The learned Additional Sessions Judge Sirohi accepted the appeal of accused Swaroop Singh and acquitted him of all the offences. The appeal of accused Nathu Singh was allowed His conviction and sentence under Section 323, I.P.C. were wide However, his conviction under Section 429. I.P.C. was maintained but the term of sentence awarded to him was reduced from six months to that of two months. The amount of fine was maintained. Accused Nathu Singh has come up in revision.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the accused petitioner did not challenge his conviction. The only submission made by...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Ramdas Amritlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-11-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN664
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. The Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, Ajmer (The Board herein) has referred the following question of law for our decision:Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case the galvanised corrugated sheets corrugated sheets come within the definition of iron and steel for the relevant assessment period?2. The dealer-assessee (respondent) was assessed by the CTO Pali (Assessing Authority) in respect of the year 1964-65 Under Section 10 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act (No. XIIX of 1984) (for short 'the Act' herein) and held that the sale of galvanized corrugated sheets were liable to tax at general rate for the relevant assessment period. The dealer-assessee was unsuccessful in appeal. A revision was filed before the Board. The Board by its order dated September 18, 1974 held that the sale of galvanised corrugated sheets are taxable @ 2% and not @ 6% as decided by the Assessing Authority and the Deputy Commissioner, (Appeals) Commercial Taxes, Jodhpur, in appeal. It w...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-1984
Reported in: [1986]62STC79(Raj); 1984()WLN427
N.M. Kasliwal, J. 1. The Board of Revenue by its order dated 23rd May, 1975, has sent the following question for the opinion of this Court under Section 15(1) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'):Whether an order of the Board under Sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, revising a part of the order impugned by the dealer, passed before the expiry of the period prescribed in the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the said Act, operates as res judicata in respect of all the matters covered by the impugned order 2. It may be mentioned at the outset that the Commercial Taxes Officer (Special Circle I), Jaipur, had requested the Board to refer the following question of law to the High Court :Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board wa9 justified in holding that the revision petition filed by the assessing authority is not maintainable because the order has become part of the Board's order da...
Ganesh Ram Vs. Paras Finance Company and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN245
K.S. Lodha, J.1. This revision has been filed by one of the defendants against the order of the Additional District Judge, Sirohi, dated 16-4-1983 holding that the document in question was validly registered and admissible in evidence.2. The brief facts giving rise to this revision are that the plaintiff M/s Paras Finance Co. filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Sirohi for recovery of Rs, 59,392.15 on the basis of a mortgage deed dated 28-11-1965, registered on 29-11-1965 by the District Registrar, Jodhpur, against Kapoor Chand, defendant No. 1 who is non-petitioner No. 2 in the present revision and the present petitioner who is defendant No. 2. The case of the plaintiff was that defendant No. 1 had created a simple mortgage of the property in dispute in favour of the plaintiff but thereafter the property in dispute was sold for recovery of some government dues and was purchased by the present petitioner. The plaintiff wants to enforce the liability under the mortgag...
Nav Bharat Construction Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN769
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. This appeal has been filed under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act. It is directed against the order dated 11th November, 1982 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jhalawar on an application submitted by the appellant under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the appellant entered into a contract with the Irrigation Department of the Government of Rajasthan, for construction woikat Bhim Sagar Dam. In connection with the aforesaid construction work, certain disputes arose between the appellant and the State Government. The contract contains an arbitration clause. The appellant moved an application under Section 20 of the Act for referring the following disputes for arbitration in accordance with the arbitration agreement contained in clause 41 of the contract:(1) Extra payment for Chisal Dressed Face Stones which was used for the construction.(2) Additional payment on account of the increase in the minimum wages o...
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ganeshilal Lal Chand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-03-1984
Reported in: (1984)43CTR(Raj)120; [1985]154ITR274(Raj)
Kasliwal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, has referred the following question of law for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the reopening of the assessment under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not valid ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the previous year in respect of the income from undisclosed sources would be financial year and not the accounting year of the assessee ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 26,000 from the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 1956-57 and Rs. 15,600 from the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 1957-58 ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in cancelling the penalties levied under Section 271(1)(c) ...
Harish Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-03-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN87
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. This bail application has been moved by petitioner Harish under Section 438 Cr. PC. A case under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act has been registered against the petitioner on the basis of FIR No. 70/84 of Police Station Kotwali, Alwar. The said petitioner had earlier moved a Misc. Bail application No. 436/84 before this Court under Section 438 Cr. PC. The said application was dismissed by this Court by the order dated 29th March, 1984 with the observations that the petitioner should approach the Sessions Judge first before moving this Court under Section 438 Cr. PC. Thereafter the petitioner moved a petition under Section 438 Cr. PC. There after the petitioner moved a petition under Section 438 Cr. PC before the Special Judge, Alwar under the Essential Commodities(Special Provisions) Act, 1981. The said application was dismissed by the Special Judge on 12th April, 1984 on the ground that no petition under Section 438 Cr. PC lies in view of the provision ...
Vishwakarma Timber Mart Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-01-1984
Reported in: 1984WLN402
P.K. Banerjee, C.J.1. This rule is directed against the Notification dated August 19, 1975 by which amongst 'Forest Produce' 'Timber' (Imarti Lakdi) was added and sought to be brought into the four-corners of the Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The argument of Mr. Maloo, on behalf of the petitioner, is limited to one point, i.e. 'Imarti Lakdi' is a forest produce and cannot be agricultural produce within the meaning of the Act. 'Agricultural produce' has been defined in Section 2(i) of the Act as follows:agricultural produce' includes all produce whether of agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry or otherwise as specified in the Schedule.Mr. Maloo contended that the word 'or otherwise' should be read as generis to the words agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry. A forest produce cannot to used as generis with these wordes. Mr. Khan, on the other hand, however, contended that principle of ejusdem generis has no applica...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›