Rajasthan Court April 1985 Judgments
Deepak Khosla Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)143
K.S. Lodha, J.1. The learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrage Rajnagar has taken cognizance of an offence Under Section 304A IPC against the present petitioner Deepak Khosla. Being aggrieved of this he has filed the present application Under Section 482 Cr. PC.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the present petitioner is the owner of Marbles LT Upper Factory in village Pasund and deceased Nandlal was an employee of this factory. On 25-5-1982, the petitioner is alleged to have asked the deceased Nandlal to go over to the shed of the factory for its repairs. Nandal refused to climb the roof as there were live electric wires passing just about a few feet over the roof. However, the petitioner is alleged to have insisted upon his climbing the roof and it is also alleged that he threatened him that if he did not do so, he would not pay him his dues. Thereupon Nandlal climbed the roof but just after a little while he fell down from the roof and received injuries. Petitioner Deepak...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Vardhichand Pannalal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-1985
Reported in: [1986]159ITR194(Raj)
S.K. Mal Lodha, J. 1. These seven reference applications detailed in schedule ' A ' will be disposed of by a common order as they were heard together.2. These reference applications relate to the assessment years 1966-67 to 1972-73. The Wealth-tax Officer passed the assessment orders under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (' the Act' herein), in respect of the assessment years 1966-67 to 1972-73. He included the wealth belonging to unseparated coparceners, Narain Lal and Onkar Lal, in the assets of the family. The assessee, M/s. Vardhichand Pannalal, Udaipur, filed appeals against the assessment orders of the Wealth-tax Officer. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed the appeals filed by the assessee. In view of the finding of the Tribunal in the matter and also as held earlier in Appeal No. 1035/76-77 in its order dated July 14, 1977, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner opined that the Wealth-tax Officer was not justified in including the wealth belonging to Onkarlal and Narain Lal in ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ratan Chand Samir Mal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-1985
Reported in: [1985]154ITR399(Raj)
Mal Lodha, J.1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), for a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur ('the Tribunal'), to refer the alleged question of law as stated in para, 5 of the application, which is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, including the fact that there was evidence on record regarding the weight of each glass to be 114 gms. and the fact that the alleged purchase bills of the glasses were produced only before the AAC and the ITO was not afforded any opportunity to examine these bills, as also the fact that a sum of Rs. 25,074 had already been allowed by the ITO by way of advertisement expenses, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 98,701 claimed as sales promotion expenses was an admissible expenditure in the computation of the assessee's total income for the assessment year 1973-74 ?'2. The assessee-responde...
Tag this Judgment!Yashwant Gauri Shanker Trivedi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN681
Surendra Nath Bhargava, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as Food Assistant in Agricultural department vide order dated 22-7-1950 in the grade of 100-5-115-10-200. The petitioner thereafter was selected on the post of Food Assistant by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission in the year 1952 and was confirmed on the said post with effect from 1-7-1959. The petitioner was thereafter appointed as Agricultural Extension Officer. Later on he was appointed as District Agricultural Officer in the pay scale of 200-600 which was revised to 285-800. Thereafter the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Conservation Officer, which is an equivalent post to that of District Agricultural Officer, in 1965. He was posted as a Lecturer in Gram Sewak Training Centre in the year 1972. He was posted as Agricultural Information Officer. The petitioner has thus claimed that he was senior to the non-petitioners. The seniority list was published vide Annexure 5 in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated 1-2-19...
Tag this Judgment!Nathulal Vs. R.S.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)78
M.C. Jain, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. By order dated 21-10-1982 Anx. 3 the petitioner's services were terminated by the Divisional Manager and the same order upheld in appeal by the Appellate Authority and his appeal was dismissed on 3-6 1983 Anx. 6.2. Counsel for the respondents raised preliminary objections. First of all he submitted that the writ petition was filed with inordinate delay. The appellant order was passed on 3-6-1983 and the writ petition was filed on 20-2-1984. When he referred to paras 6 and 7 he urged that it is strange that the petitioner did not receive the letters said to have been sent to him by his counsel, although the petitioner's letters were received by his counsel. From paras 6 and 7 it appears that there was some exchange of communications between the petitioner and his counsel but it was on account of non-communication that the petitioner could not present the petition and the petitioner had to come himself to the counsel for filing of th...
Tag this Judgment!Nisar Mohammed Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)332
Vinod Shanker Dave, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. A serious dispute about the identification of the accused has been raised in this case and it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is not the one who has committed rape with the prosecutrix. It has rightly been observed by the learned Sessions Judge that this will be a question to be decided at the time of investigation, but at the same time all care and protection has to be taken that accused should be got identified by the prosecutrix, if she can. The an innocent person is not made an accused by prior showing to the prosecutrix in police custody and therefore I deem it proper, in the interest of justice, that accused shall report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate who will forward him to judicial custody on the same day and will depute a Magistrate to hold the test identification parade on that very day, for that a date for surrendering may be intimated well in advance which shall not be later t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sohan Sankhla
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-19-1985
Reported in: [1986]157ITR437(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. These two applications under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which have been filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Jodhpur, arise in similar circumstances, raise identical questions and as such they are disposed of together by a common order.2. Dr. Sohan Sankhla is an assessee as an individual. He filed his returns of income for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. The Income-tax Officer found that the assessee had purchased immovable property for a sum of Rs. 60,000 in the name of his minor sons, Anil Kumar and Arun Kumar, during the accounting years relevant to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. According to the Income-tax Officer, the house property in question was purchased by Dr. Sohan Sankhla himself in the name of his minor sons and so the income earned from the house property was added to the income shown by Dr. Sankhla in his returns in respect of the aforesaid two assessment years. The order passed by the Income-tax Officer was a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Anand Gum Industries
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-19-1985
Reported in: (1986)54CTR(Raj)17; [1985]154ITR680(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J. 1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), praying that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal'), may be directed to submit a statement of the case and refer the following question of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal dated June 30, 1978, to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified to hold that the sum of Rs. 18,501 pertaining to installation of poles and additional power lines by the R.S.E.B. was admissible as deduction in the computation of the assessee's total income for the assessment year 1974-75 ?'2. The assessee is a registered partnership firm engaged in the manufacture of guwar gum and pulses used as cattle feed. In the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1974-75, the assessee incurred an expenditure of Rs. 18,501 in the installation of poles and additional pow...
Tag this Judgment!Bagh Singh and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-19-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN392
K.S. Lodha, J.1. The two accused petitioners have filed this application Under Section 482 Cr. P.C. against the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chittor Garh dated 15-10-82 by which cognizance of the offences Under Sections 467, 468, 471 read with 120B I.P.C. has been taken against them.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that one Trilok Singh filed a FIR against Harjinder Singh alleging that a truck No. RJZ 2115 was registered in the name of Mohd. Sharif who sold it to Habib and Ramesh Chandra and Ramesh Chandra in his turn sold it to Trilok Singh and the accused Harjinder Singh. It was further alleged that Trilok Singh invested a sum of Rs. 18, 000/- and Harjinder Singh invested a sum of Rs. 17,000/- for the purchase of this truck and it was agreed that the rest of the amount shall be paid at the time of the transfer of the registration to Ramesh Chandra. The truck was kept in the custody of Harjinder Singh and he was to maintain the accounts. However, it was f...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-18-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN49
Gopal Kishan Sharma, J.1. Shivsingh and Tejsingh accused appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, dated 30th November, 1982, convicting them of the offence Under Section 302/34, IPC and sentencing each of them to impisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 50/-and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's R.I.2. One Madan Singh lodged a report on 19th October, 1981, at about 10-30 AM, at PS Gangadhar, wherein he stated that one Dungarsingh (deceased) was his real uncle, and that on 18th October, 81. Nainsingh who was also his uncle, came to him and informed him that Dungarsingh was lying dead on the 'Med' of the field. The neck and the feet of Dungarsingh were tied with a 'Safa' and he was full of blood. The shoes and the 'Darati' were lying near the dead body. At this, he (Madansingh) came to village Maksi along with Nainsingh, and from there, he took Harisingh, Chander-singh, Kanchansingh and Bhagwansing his father, and ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »