Rajasthan Court January 1985 Judgments
Ram Babu and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)200
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. This revision has been filed by the three petitioners Ram Babu, Uma Shanker and Bhagwati Prasad against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Banswara, dt. 26-3-1984 by which he took cognizance of the offences Under Sections 420 and 342 IPC against them disagreeing with the final report filed by the police.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are these : On 18-12-1983, Tej Pal s/o Roop Chand filed a FIR at police station Banswara that on that morning when he and his father were at their house, Jaswant and Bhagwati Lal came there and told his father that if he wanted to sell his shop situated in Banswara, he may go with them to hotel Shri Ram Lodge where a seth had come and wanted to purchase the same. However, at the hotel no talk about the sale of the shop took place but he was forced to play the game of 'Tikris' (some sort of gambling). At the end of the game in which Jaswant, Bhagwati Lal, Ram Babu and Uma Shanker participated they told Roop Chan...
Tag this Judgment!Gyarsaya and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)652
Surendra Nath Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment order dated 24th January, 1981 of Sessions Judge, Jaipur District Jaipur convicting and sentencing the accused appellants under Sections 447, 302, 302/34, 323, 323/34 IPC.2. The prosecution case briefly stated is that Smt. Bhuri wife of Mehar Chand submitted a written report to the Additional Superintendent of Police on 7-11-1978 at 11.45 p.m. that she was staying with her husband Mehar Chand in Village Tewari, Tehsil Viratnagar District Jaipur after her husband had served in the Police for 14 years and were in possession of 30 bighas of Sawaichak land and was cultivating the same for last 10-15 years. Her husband and her son were busy in cutting the grass, when suddenly Gyarsa, Sonya, Cheetar and one more person, whose name she could not recollect but whom she could recognise, came to the field on 6-11-1978 carrying sword, farshi and sticks and gave beating to her husband, as a result he died at the spot. The S.H.O., ...
Tag this Judgment!Kanti Lal Purshottam and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1985
Reported in: (1986)53CTR(Raj)19; [1985]155ITR519(Raj); 1986(2)WLN357
Bhargava, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Following two questions of law have been referred for opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the word 'expenditure' as used in Sub-section (3) of Section 40A would include the cost of purchasing the goods meant for resale ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under Clause (f) or Clause (j) of Rule 6DD in respect of the payment regarding the purchase of the goods from other traders '2. The assessee-firm is carrying on business of commission agency and kirana goods at Ramganj Mandi. The assessee-firm purchased 'dhania' goods and out of the total purchases, those paid for in cash in excess of Rs. 2,500 between April 1, 1969, to June 2, 1969, amounted to Rs. 41,922. Accord...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Poonam Chand Uttamchand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1985
Reported in: [1986]63STC131(Raj)
S.N. Bhargava, J.This a reference under Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), by which the Board of Revenue has referred the following question of law for opinion of this Court:Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the special appeal presented by Shri Dalu Ram Sharma, D.P., was improperly presented 2. Facts, briefly stated, relating to the disposal of this reference may be stated as under:3. Assessing authority (A.C.T.O., Beawar) determined the tax liability of the respondent M/s. Poonam Chand Uttamchand of Beawar. The assessee went in appeal to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes, Ajmer, against the order of the assessing authority which was allowed. Against this order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes, Ajmer, the State of Rajasthan moved an application under Section 14(1) before the Board of Revenue for revising the said order. A single member bench of the Board of Revenue upheld th...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN338
Gopal Krishna Sharma, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 26th March 1979, passed by the Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur, by Which, he maintained the conviction of the petitioner for the offence Under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short, hereinafter 'the Act'), but reduced the sentence 1 year's SI to that of 6 months and maintained the sentence of fine as awarded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was ordered to undergo the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the lower court.2. Succinctly stated, the facts of the case giving rise to this revision petition, are that on 5th Jan. 1976, at about 1 P.M., Ramgopal Sharma, Food Inspector, visited the house of the petitioner and found the petitioner selling 'Paan-ka-Masala' which he suspected to be adulterated. After disclosing his identity, he purchased 600 gms. of the said 'Paan-ka-Masala' from the petitioner, for the purpose ...
Tag this Judgment!A.C.T.O. Vs. Poonam Chand Uttamchand
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN329
S.N. Bhargava, J.1. This is a reference under Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by which the Board of Revenue has referred the following question of law for opinion of this Court:Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Special Appeal presented by Shri Baluram Sharma D.P. was improperly presented?2. Facts, briefly stated, relating to the disposal of this reference may be stated as under: Assessing Authority (A.C.T.O., Beawar) determined the tax liability of the respondent M/s. Poonam Chand Uttam Chand of Beawar. The assessee went in appeal to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Commercial Taxes, Ajmer against the order of the Assessing Authority which was allowed. Against this order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Commercial Taxes, Ajmer, the State of Rajasthan moved an application under Section 14(1) before the Board of Revenue for revising the said order. A Single Member Bench of the Board of Revenue upheld the or...
Tag this Judgment!Santosh Kumari Vs. Virendra Kumar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN445
Kishore Singh Lodha1. This is a wife's appeal against that judgment and decree of the learned Distt. Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated 13-8-1984 dissolving the marriage between her and her husband by mutual consent.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated here. The parties are Hindus by caste and their marriage had taken place on 16.2.75 at Suratgarh. They lived together till 15-10-1979, and a daughter was born out of this wed-lock on 26-5-1978. The husband Shri Virendra Kumar filed an application Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (here in after called 'the Act') for dissolution of the marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. The application was contested by the wife. The facts of the marriage and the birth of the daughter were admitted but the facts of cruelty and desertion were denied. On the other hand, cruelty was alleged on the part of the husband and his parents. Issues on the pleadings of the parties were framed on 22.3.84. However, before this, ...
Tag this Judgment!Deoki Nandan Kulshreshtha Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)103
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. Deoki Nandan Kulshreshta, the petitioner in this writ petitioner, joined Government service as Patwari in the Colonisation Department of the Government of Rajasthan on 18th June, 1956. He was subsequently promoted as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) and thereafter, on his own request, the petitioner was transferred to the Sheep and Wool Department of the Government of Rajasthan and was posted as Upper Division Clerk (UDC), Accounts clerk in the said department. While he was working on the post of Accounts Clerk at the Sheep and Wool Extension Centre, Hanumangarh, District Churu, the order dated 25th June, 1968 was passed whereby the petitioner was transferred to the Sheep and Wool Extension Centre, Ramgarh, District Jaisalmer. On the representation of the petitioner, an order dated 10th July, 1968 was passed whereby the transfer order dated 25th June, 1968 was kept in abeyance. The aforesaid order dated 10th July, 1968 was however, revoked by order dated 25th October, 1968...
Tag this Judgment!Kalya Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-29-1985
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)307
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. This revision petition is preferred against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Bundi dated 24th June, 1978 by which he dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and convicted him under Section 77 of the Rajasthan Forest Act (here in after to be called as the Act'), and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 1 month's imprisonment.2. The petitioner was prosecuted in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bundi, for contravening sub-rules (i), (ii) & (iii) of Rule-9 of the Rajasthan Forest (Produce Transit) Rules, 1957 (here in after to be called as 'the Rules'). The learned Magistrate after trial, found the petition of guilty of contravening the rules which was punishable under Section 42 of the Act. He sentenced the petitioner to 2 months' RI and a fine of Rs. 200/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's RI. The petitioner then preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge Bundi, who held tha...
Tag this Judgment!Samarath Lal Joshi and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN309
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. These writ petitions raise common questions with regard to the constitutional validity of Rule 8(2)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are employees of the Government of Rajasthan and have joined the service prior to 1st January,1979 The petitioners applied for correction of their date of birth entry in their service record. In SBCW No. 634 of 1982 the aforesaid request of the petitioner was rejected by the order of the Superintendent of Police dated 11th August, 1981, Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the said petitioner filed an appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), but the said appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that in view of the amended Rule 8 of the Rules, no correction can be m...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »