Rajasthan Court October 1986 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.
Mahaveer Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-29-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)16
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. Accused Mahaveer was convicted under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment by the Sessions Judge, Bikaner by his judgment dated January 30, 1981. He has come-up in appeal and challenges his conviction.2. Briefly recalled, the prosecution case is that PW 5 Smt. Shakuntala is the daughter of PW 1 Mamraj of village Chak 16-B.D. District Sri Ganganagar. Smt. Shakuntala was married to accused, somewhere 18 months before the incident. The deceased-victim Balram, aged about 20 years, was the son of PW 1 Mamraj. The relations between Smt. Shakuntala and the members of the husband's family were not happy. They used to take her to task off and on as she had not brought dowry from her parents. The accused was also not kind to her and used violence at times. Smt. Shakuntala, finding herself in these torturous circumstances, left her husband's ...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Smt. Rukmani Devi and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN143
Narendra Mohan Kasliwal, J.1. In a Sessions case No. 10/1983 Mst. Rukmani was tried under Section 302. I.P.C. for committing the murder of her daughter-in-law Smt. Kamla. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dausa after recording the evidence passed an order of acquittal on 3rd March, 1984. The State did not file any appeal against the above order of acquittal. On 22nd February, 1986 when Lok Adalat was held at Alwar, an application was submitted on behalf of Beena Kumari daughter of Shiv Dayal before Hon'ble Justice G.M. Lodha. On the said application Justice Lodha passed an order treating the said application as suo moto revision against the order of acquittal. Thereafter, on 25th February, 1986 Justice Lodha passed the following order in chambers.25-2-1986 Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.M. Lodha (In Chambers)At the Lok Adalat, Alwar, on 22nd February, 1986, this application too was presented for being treated as suo-moto revision against the order of acquittal.The office should register it as ...
Ram Prasad Vs. Guljari Lal by Lrs. Bhanwari Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN565
Farooq Hassan, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the trial court on an application filed by the defendant-petitioner under Order 6, Rule 17, CPC, for seeking amendment in his written statement, which was rejected by the trial court on May 2, 1986.2. Brief facts leading to this petition are that the plaintiff-non-petitioner filed a suit against the defendant-petitioner for recovery of rent and ejectment from the rented shop on the ground of personal necessity. It is alleged that during the pendency of the suit, it came to the knowledge of the petitioner-defendant that the landlord-plaintiff was having one shop in Krishi Grain Mandi, Kotputli duly allotted to him and the non-petitioner-plaintiff has already started carrying on his business in it, and that, the [plaintiff-land lord was also having shop in Katla, Kotputli in his possession which is lying vacant. As such, the petitioner-defendant moved an application under Order 6, Rule 17, seeking amendment in th...
Jagjit Cotton Textiles Mills Ltd. Vs. Authority Appointed Under the Pa ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN237
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the quashing of the Order dated June 13, 1986 passed by the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act (here in after to be referred as '(he Authority') by which the objection of the petitioner regarding the jurisdiction of the Authority to entertain the application of the non-petitioners No. 2 to 11 under Section 15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 was over-ruled.2. The petitioner, a registered company under the Company Act, having a Textile Mill at Sri Ganganagar Rajasthan, dismissed some workmen from service on the ground that they were guilty of serious acts of misconduct under the Certified Standing orders of the Company. A reference in a matter relating to one Hukma Ram and the management was pending in the Labour Court Bikaner. The management, taking it to be proceedings pending before the Labour Court made an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the I...
Kabra Alias Bhura Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)336
Vinod Shanker Dave, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated August 14, 1985 and September 4, 1985 of Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City convicting and sentencing the accused appellant as under:Under Section 395 IPC 7 years RI and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in defaultof payment of fine to further undergo RI forone month;Under Section 397/398, IPC 7 years RI;Under Section 459, IPC 7 years RI and a fine of Rs. 200/- in defaultof payment of fine to furthhr undergo RI fortwo months;All the sentences of imprisonment have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case is that a report was lodged at police station Mandavar on October 4, 1983 by one Dwarka Prasad where in he informed the police also that 6-7 miscreants have entered their house and looted the property and have also opened fire, he has escaped and came to report. On receipt of this a case was registered under Section 395/397 IPC and the Station House Officer started for the site. By the time he reached t...
Mukh Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)617
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. This appeal by the accused is directed against the judgment dated August 7, 1976 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh, convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC to life imprisonment and under Section 27 of the Arms Act to two years' rigourous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to 3 month's further rigorous imprisonment.2. The case relates to the incident which took place on March 11, 1974, at about 4.15 pm. at the house of Ganpat Ram in village Naiwala which resulted in the death of Chet Ram by a gun shot injury. The version given in the First Information lodged at Police Station Tibbi on March 12, 1974 at 8.15 a.m. by Shri Ram brother of the deceased was that on the date of the incident at about 4.15 p.m. the accused had gone to the house of Ganpat Ram in connection with the marriage of his son. The accused was having a gun with him. He went inside the house, leaving his gun on a cot o...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sadul Textiles Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-27-1986
Reported in: (1987)59CTR(Raj)98; [1987]167ITR634(Raj)
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue to answer the following question of law:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on the weight of the entire record, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no cessation of liability of the assessee-company in respect of the two amounts, namely, Rs. 16,336 and Rs. 98,091, being unclaimed wages and unclaimed bonus, respectively, and in deleting the said two amounts from the total income of the assessee-company for the assessment year 1972-73?'2. The relevant assessment year is 1972-73. The assessee was allowed deduction of the sums of Rs. 16,366 and Rs. 98,091 towards wages and bonus in earlier years but the same remained unclaimed by the workmen. For this reason, the question arose during the relevant assessment year 1972-73 whether these amounts of unclaimed wages and unclaimed bonus were taxable in that year under Section 41(1) o...
Narsingh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-27-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)140
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner have been convicted for the offence under Section 4/9 Opium Act and have been sentenced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Both the Courts below have rightly found that the opium has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. In all 26.950 kg. opium was recovered. Both the courts have relied upon the prosecution evidence. Even there is sufficient proof that the seized opium was sent for chemical examination and on examination it was found that the recovered article was the opium There is no reason to take a different view and, in my opinion, the petitioners are rightly convicted for the offence under section 4/9 of the Opium Act.3. Coming to the question of sentence, I am of the opinion that the sentence awarded to the petitioners is severe. The petitioners have faced a protracted trial. More than 16 years hav...
Sohan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN561
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. Sohan Lal was convicted under Section 409 I.P.C. and sentenced to six months' r. i. and a fine of Rs. 200/- by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Churu by his judgment dated 3-5-1979 and his appeal has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Churu on 20-7-1979. He has now come up in revision.2. The brief facts leading to this revision may be stated here. Some green 'khejadi' trees were found lying cut at the lime kiln of Goru Ram. PW 1 and a report in this respect was made to the 'Panchayat', where upon a case under Section 379 I.P.C. was got registered against Goru Ram with the police Goru Ram's plea in that case was that he had cut those 'khejadi' trees after having purchased them from the patwari, the present accused Sohan Lal on payment of Rs. 125/- and he produced a receipt to that before the police. It appears that the police accepted this version of Goru Ram and exonerated him but registered a case under Section 409 I.P.C. against the present ...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Smt. Vidya Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-24-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN380
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. In all these four appeal, the judgment and award dated 16-10-1985 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhunjhunu is being challenged. It is common ground that on 9-7-1982 Prem Chand and Prabhu Dayal were going on Motor Cycle No. DEX 584 from Khetri City to their village Sohil. A bus bearing registration No. RST 4831 belonging to Sophia School Khetri was coming from the side of Khetri township which collided with the motor cycle at wear about Nizampur turn. The accident resulted in death of both Premchand and Prabhu Dayal. The driver of the bus was Mahaveer. The claim petitions were filed by the claimants who are wives and children of Prem Chand and Prabhu Dayal. In the two claim petitions the question of negligence was first considered and decided and in both cases the Tribunal has found that the negligence of the driver Mahaveer is established on record. It is also being found and rightly so that since Mahaveer was negligent and the accident resulted in death o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »