Rajasthan Court August 1985 Judgments
Ganesh Kant Vs. Hira Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC350
Mohini Kapur, J.1. By Order dated 15th June, 1984, the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, awarded a sum of Rs. 67,775, to the appellant, on account of the compensation due to injury received by him in the accident. Interest at the rate of 10% per annum has been allowed from 9th June, 1984. It has also been ordered that out of this sum, Rs. 50,000/- alongwith interest on this amount shall be paid by the Insurance Company. The complainant is disatisfied with the compensation awarded to him and has preferred this appeal. The opposite party Hira Lal and Ranglal have preferred cross-objections in this appeal. They are the owner and driver of the truck, which was involved in the accident and their contention is that the accident occurred due to negligence of the claimant himself and as such he is not entitled to any compensation. Secondly, it is contended that the amount awarded as compensation is excessive.2. On 12th December, 1979; at about 3 or 3.30 pm in the afternoon, truc...
Tag this Judgment!Manak Lal and ors. Vs. Mahendra Singh and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: AIR1987Raj14
S.S. Byas, J. 1. This civil miscellaneous appeal of the plaintiffs is directed against an order passed by Mr. Bahadur Singh Chandwat, Additional District Judge, Udaipur on Sept. 21, 1984, whereby he dismissed their appeal and maintained the order of the Additional Civil Judge (2), Udaipur, by which the appellants' request for temporary injunction was turned down.2. Very few facts need narration for the disposal of this appeal. The plaintiffs instituted a suit for perpetual' prohibitory injunction against the defendants. It was averred by them that the defendants are raising unauthorised constructions in a plot of land. The constructions are likely to cause substantial injury to the plaintiffs. Along with the filing of the suit, the plaintiffs submitted an application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. and prayed that pending the final disposal of the suit, the defendants be restrained from raising constructions. The learned Additional Civil Judge heard the parties and by his lo...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Duduwala and Co.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: (1985)53CTR(Raj)327; [1986]160ITR170(Raj); 1985(2)WLN783
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi ('the Tribunal' herein), has referred the following question for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing that in a case even though one assessment may be called for being made on the assessee in the status of an 'association of persons', the tax liability to be determined would have to be to the same extent and in the like manner as in the case of the beneficiaries directly or on the erstwhile partners through their representatives under the provisions of Section 41 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 and under Section 161 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the assessment years 1962-63 to 1966-67?'2. The assessee, M/s. Duduwala & Co., was a registered firm consisting of two partners : (1) Shri Rai Bahadur Rameshwar Nathany, who died on January 18, 1957, and had...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ramdeo Samadhi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: (1986)50CTR(Raj)61; [1986]160ITR179(Raj); 1985(2)WLN161
S.K. Mal Lodha J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur ('the Tribunal' herein), has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there is any income from any source assessable in the hands of the assessee known as Shri Ramdeora Samadhi, Ramdeora, for the assessment year 1973-74? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there exists a body of individuals representing Shri Ramdeora Samadhi on whom the impugned assessment could be made ?' 2. These questions are said to arise out of the order dated June 28, 1979, passed in I.T.A. No. 418/JP/1977-78 by the Tribunal. The assessment year involved is 1973-74. Shri Ramdeoji was the local Ruler of the area which is part of Jodhpur and Jaisalmer Districts of Western desert area of Rajasthan. He was a very pious person. The events during his life Considerably influenced hi...
Tag this Judgment!Har Vilas Vs. Kalyan Prasad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: 1985(2)WLN474
Panna Chand Jain, J.1. This is a revision petition by the defendant petitioner under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 12th July, 1985, passed by the learned Munsiff Magistrate to Karauli, in Civil suit No. 27 of 1975, dismissing the application dated 16th February, 1985, by which the defendant desired to examine the Handwriting Export to prove the document Ex. A-3 alleged to bear the signature of the plaintiff's father Kishan Lal.2. Notice has been taken by the defendant by entering upon a caveat and the parties desired that the revision petition be disposed of at this stage, as such, this revision petition is being decided at the admission stage.3. The admitted facts of the case are that in a suit for injunction, possession and partition, filed by the plaintiff Kalyan Prasad against the defendant petitioner arid others in the Court of the learned Munsiff Magistrate Karauli, the evidence of the plaintiff was closed and the defendant was aducing his evi...
Tag this Judgment!Manak Lal and ors. Vs. Mahendra Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: 1985(1)WLN810
S.S. Byas, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal of the plaintiffs is directed against an order passed by Mr. Bahadur Singh Chandrawat, Additional District Judge, Udaipur on September 21, 1984, whereby he dismissed their appeal and maintained the order of the Additional Civil Judge (2), Udaipur, by which the appellants request for temporary injunction was turned down.2. Very few facts need narration for the disposal of this appeal The plaintiffs instituted a suit for perpetual prohibitory injunction against the defendants. It was averred by them that the defendants are raising unauthorised constructions in a plot of land. The constructions are likely to cause substantial injury to the plaintiffs. Along with the filing of the suit, the plaintiffs submitted an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and prayed that pending the final disposal of the suit, the defendants be restrained from raising constructions. The learned Additional Civil Judge heard the pa...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Prithvi Singh and 8 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)WLN200
Narendra Mohan Kasliwal, J.1. As identical questions of law are involved in all the above special appeals, the same are disposed of by one single order.2. In order to appreciate the questions of law arising in these cases, we would like to narrate the facts of one case in SB. Civil Writ Petition No. 1274/75 Prithvi Singh v. State of Rajasthan.3. The petitioner held 47 Bighas, 7 Biswas of land in Village Palkiya, Tehsil Sangod, District Kota. The petitioner filed a return on 3-1-1974 under Section 10 of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973, here in after referred to as 'new ceiling law'. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Ramganj Mandi passed an order on 10-4-1975 (Annexure-2) that the matter was to be decided under the old ceiling law and as the case had not been registered under the old ceiling law, the same be registered now, and proceedings be taken up separately. It was further directed that the petitioner should file a return under the old ceiling law ta...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surajbhan Om Prakash
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-1985
Reported in: [1986]160ITR833(Raj); 1985(2)WLN5
S.K. Mal Lodha J.1. At the instance of Commissioner of Income-tax, Jodhpur, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (the ' Tribunal ' herein), has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court which are said to arise out of its order dated June 17, 1978, passed in ITA No. 21/JP/77-78 : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified holding that on the death of Shri Surajbhan, the firm was dissolved on July 1, 1974 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified holding that there should be two assessments (one up to July 1, 1974, and the other from July 1, 1974, up to the end of the accounting year) and not one assessment for the whole accounting year ' 2. The assessee is a partnership firm known as Surajbhan Om Prakash, Raisinghnagar. The assessment year involved is 1975-76. The assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1975-76 filed two returns...
Tag this Judgment!Shanker Singh Vs. Nahar Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)230
Dwarka Prasad Gupta, J.1. The question which was raised by the learned counsel for the defendant-appellant in this second appeal is as to whether the suit for pre-emption could have been decreed in respect of sale of Khatedari rights in agricultural land, in accordance with the law which prevailed before the promulgation of the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act, 1956, in the areas comprised in the former State of Mewar.2. The plaintiff claimed to be co-sharer with defendant No. 3 Bhupal Singh, as also a sharer in appendages in certain agricultural lands, of which they were Khatedar tenants. It was claimed by the plaintiff that the agricultural lands in dispute were formally owned and possessed by the plaintiff but subsequently he was recorded as Khatedar tenant in respect thereof, while in respect of some of the lands the plaintiff and defendant No. 3 were jointly entered as Khatedar tenants. The right of pre-emption was claimed on the basis of custom prevailing in Rajasthan and which was judi...
Tag this Judgment!Adiya and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: 1985WLN(UC)242
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. These two appeals through jail arise from the judgment dated July 18, 1974 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalore. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalore convicted the appellant Adiya of the offence Under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life. The appellant Veesa was found guilty of the offence Under Section 302/34 IPC. He, too was awarded sentence of imprisonment for life. Both of the them were also sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100/- in default of payment of fine to under go one month's rigorous imprisonment.2. The prosecution story briefly stated is that on April 7, 1973 at about 6 P.M. the informant Narsa (PW 2) was working in his field along with two labourers Amariya and Lachhiya, Deceased Tariya visited the field of Narsa in connection with fetching water. He brought with him an earthen pitcher and asked Narsa to run the well so that he may fill water in his pitcher. Narsa thereupon told him that he will just start his wel...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »