Rajasthan Court August 1985 Judgments
Krishna Autar Maheshwari Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-22-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)209
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition against his threatened reversion from the post of Statistical Officer. The petitioner was appointed as Statistical Inspector on 15th June, 1961 on ad hoc basic. The petitioner was thereafter selected by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission and he came to be regularly appointed on the post of Statistical Inspector. Thereafter the petitioner came to be confirmed on the post of Statistical Officer with effect from 1st March, 1969. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Statistical Assistant on temporary basis but later on he was confirmed on this post with effect from 18th June, 1979. The petitioner came to be promoted to the post of Statistical Officer by order dated 31st March, 1980 for a period of four months or till a duly selected candidates from the Rajasthan Public Service Commission or Departmental Promotion Committee are available which ever is earlier. This period of temporary appointment of the p...
Tag this Judgment!Sohan Singh S/O Shri Ashu Ram Hansa Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-22-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)180
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This application is directed against the order dated 28-6-1985 of the Judicial Magistrate No. 2 Jodhpur directing that the notices be issued to the Rajasthan Financial Corporation. The petitioner, in addition to the prayer that the Order dated 28-6-1985 be set aside has further prayed that the truck, whose engine No. 692--D02-7911004 and the Chesis No. 344-052-94789 be delivered to him. It appears that the Learned Magistrate without deciding the application dated 10-6-1985 made by the petitioner and another application dated 18-6-1985 made by the respondents Nos. 3 and 4, has passed the impugned order and directed to implead the Rajasthan Financial Corporation as necessary party and to issue the notice to the Rajasthan Financial Corporation. It does not appear from the record how the Rajasthan Financial Corporation was considered to be a necessary party for the disposal of the truck in question.2. I do not think it proper that the considerations of these applicati...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Chand Gauri Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-22-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)239
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J. 1. The petitioner by this writ petition has challenged the order of compulsory retirement from the service dated 20th June, 1983 (Annexure R/1).2. The petitioner was in service of the Punjab National Bank (here in after referred as the respondent Bank) and was posted at Jodhpur as Regional Manager. The respondent Bank after review of the service record of the petitioner compulsorily retired him from service under Regulation 19 of the Punjab National Bank (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979 (here in after referred as the Regulations).3. This writ petition runs into marathon size writ petition, amendment, reply to the writ petition and rejoinder, reply to rejoinder etc. and it is not necessary to record all the facts given in the writ petition & the reply and the rejoinder to the reply. Primarily four questions have been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner for my consideration, namely, that the respondent Bank has not complied with the condition prece...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Western Indian State Motors
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: [1987]163ITR194(Raj)
1. In this case, the following question of law has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, by its order dated January 31, 1976, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the interest paid by the assessee to the Sales Tax Department on the arrears of sales tax under Section 11B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, was an admissible deduction under Section 117 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. It is undisputed that the assessee paid a sum of Rs. 35,780 as interest to the Sales Tax Department under Section 11B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, on arrears of sales tax. The assessee claimed deduction in respect of the aforesaid sum againstits business income. Although the Income-tax Officer rejected the claim of the assessee, on appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax held that the said amount, paid by the assessee...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gambhir Mal Pandya
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: [1986]160ITR903(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. By this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajasthan, desires us to call upon the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to refer the following question of law arising out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal, dated February 15, 1979, to this court for its opinion :' Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the income of the assessee is assessable under Section 28 of the Income-tax Act '2. The facts of this case are not in dispute. The income in question represents lease income from a factory belonging to the assessee. The question which arose before the Income-tax Officer, Company Circle-I, Jaipur, during the assessment proceedings relating to the assessment year 1977-78, was as to whether the income of the assessee from leasing the factory was income from business or income from other sources. The Income-tax Officer was of the view t...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Murlidhar and Company
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: [1986]160ITR882(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J.1. The following question of Jaw has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act '), by its order dated April 20, 1974 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in cancelling the order under Section 263 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax '2. The assessee was registered as a firm during the assessment year 1968-69, consisting of the following partners :(1) Mirchumal,(2) Laxmandas,(3) Udhavdas,(4) Vasumal,(5) Baldeo, } Minors(6) Devidas who were admitted to the benefits of the partnership. Mirchumal entered into a partnership representing the Hindu undivided family known as Chanchaldas Sobhrajmal, of which he was the karta. Sliri Laxmandas and Udhavdas were major members of the Hindu undivided family but they joined the partnership firm in their individual capacity and were worki...
Tag this Judgment!Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Gadia Textiles and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: [1987]67STC161(Raj); 1985(2)WLN148
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. This is an application under Section 15(2)(b) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (No. 29 of 1954) (for short 'the Act'), for directing the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer ('?the Board' herein) to state the case and to refer the following questions of law arising out of its appellate order dated July 2, 1982 which it has refused to do by its order dated February 16, 1983 :1. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned D. B. was right in dismissing the special appeal in view of order dated May 21, 1982 and held that no penalty could be imposed in the instant case ?2. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, it is or it is not obligatory for the dealer to maintain separate stock register as provided under Rule 42(2) ?3. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, if nil tax is assessed whatever the tax liability, if the dealer did not maintain stock register as provided under Rule 42(2) whether amounts to co...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Mani Ram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN98
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated February 13,1974 where by, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused Maniram of the offence Under Section 302, IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act and the accused Hariram of the offence Under Section 302 read with Section 114, IPC.2. The deceased Hazurasingh and the accused-persons Maniram and Hariram had their fields adjoining to each other towards south of their village Saharni. Some 20-22 days prior to the occurrence, Hazurasingh put up a fencing over his field, which was dismantlted by the accused Maniram and others, which resulted in quarrel between Hazurasingh and Maniram. Since then, Maniram was annoyed with him. It is alleged that on 22-6-1972, Hazura Singh had gone to the field to work in the sugar-cane crop. His wife PW 1 Surjeet Kaur and son PW 2 Jaskaran aged about 13 years went to the field carrying meals for Hazurasingh. At about 12...
Tag this Judgment!Giri Raj and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN707
Dinker Lal Mehta, J.1. This Special Appeal has been preferred by the villagers of village Bahaj, Tehsil and Police Station, Deeg, District Bharatpur, against the judgment dated 11th January 1980, passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil writ petition No. 1250 of 1979, whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition.2. The respondent, Pyare Lal, is said to have encroached upon the village land and proceedings were initiated against him. On 18-9-1966, vide Annexure 1, he admitted that the land is the public land and he undertook that he would not occupy the land in future. The Gram Panchayat directed that encroachment made should be removed within a period of 15 days and a fine of Rs. 15/- was also imposed on him. Aggrieved by the said order an appeal was preferred before the Panchayat Samiti, Deeg, which was decided vide Annexure-2, dated 5-12-1966 and the appeal was dismissed.3. Against the order of the Panchayat Samiti, Deeg, dated 5-12-1966, a revision petition w...
Tag this Judgment!Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)343
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This appeal by the accused sent through jail is directed against the judgment dated the 20th June, 1984 of the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, camp at Chittorgarh, convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 376 IPC to four years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for two months.2. The case relates to the incident of rape which took place in the morning of February 16, 1982 in the khala of village Sukhpura with Narbada aged about 11 years. The prosecution case in brief is that when Marbada was on her way to the field of her father the accused met her, took her to a khala and committed rape upon her. Narbada bleeded and went to her uncle Tarachand (Tavu) and narrated the incident to him. Tarachand brought her to Mst. Hangami, her mother. Narbada told her that the accused and committed sexual inter-course with her. The father of the girl Dalu was not present at that time at their hou...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »