Rajasthan Court April 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.
Ram Swaroop and Kanhiya Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-07-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)WLN404
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. The appellants, namely, Ram Swaroop and Kanhiya have been convicted under Section 307 IPC and sentenced to 3 years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 200/- in default 2 months' R.I. According to the prosecution version, the two accused Kanhiya and Ram Swaroop, were the dacoits and they were responsible for stopping the Truck near village 'Rijhoni' Rameshwar was leader of that dacoits. The police party reached there and the accused party started firing the guns.The police party replied the encounter.2. Roshan Lal (PW 5), Har Vilas (PW 6) were caught by these accused and were being kept as captives at that time. The dacoits party left them and ran awy.3. Both the appellants have been acquitted of the offence under Section 307 IPC.4. Having heard the learned Counsel and the Public Prosecutor, I have perused the relevant record.5. It is true that merely because the evidence is of the Police Officer it cannot be discarded. The settled legal position is that conviction can be based...
Abrar Ahmed Vs. Mst. Magidan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-07-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN465
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this Misc. application are that the non-petitioner Mst. Magidan filed a complaint Under Section 125 Cr. P.C. against the petitioner Abrar Ahmed claiming a monthly maintenance of Rs. 400/- for herself and her two children. It was pleaded in the complaint that the marriage of both the parties was solemnised on 3rd June, 1959 at village Better. Out of this wedlock she gave birth to One boy and one girl and who were of the age of 15 and 13 respectively at the time of making complaint. Non-petitioner Magidan alleged physical and mental cruelty and it was further alleged that she was mercilessly beaten on 13-7-1968 and forcibly thrown out by the applicant, her husband, along with her both children. Since then she has been living with her parents under compulsion and that her father was an old person and was not financially well of to maintain her and her children. During one proceeding in the trial Court it was admitted that the ...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Ratti Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-07-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)748
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. The State of Rajasthan has filed this appeal against the acquittal of the accused-respondent from the offence of Sections 4 & 9 of the Opium Act.2. The respondent, Rattiram was alleged to have opium as per the information received by Rameshwar Dayal Head Constable of Police Station, Bakani (Jhalawar district) on 25-8-1971. A trap was arranged towards the village Motipura along with the police party. In the morning at about 2.00 a.m. accused was sighted and spotted. He was intercepted and 500 gms. opium was recovered from one bag & 800 gms. opium from another bag. The memo was prepared at the site in the presence of motbirs. Rattiram was arrested. The samples were sent to the Public Analyst which were found to contain morphine. The challan was produced after usual investigation. After trial the accused respondent was acquitted.3. Primary reason for acquittal is that the motbirs have turned hostile, Shri S.B. Mathur, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that even...
Smt. Pushpa Sharma Vs. Gopal Lal Rawat
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1986
Reported in: AIR1986Raj187; 1986(2)WLN130
Kasliwal, J.1. Learned single Judge by order dated July 12, 1985 has referred this case to the Full Bench for decision of the following issues :1. Whether in a suit based on the relationship between the landlord and tenant, making prayer for eviction on the grounds set forth under Section 13 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction), Act, 1955, a decree for possession can be granted in favour of the plaintiff on the basis of his title?2. Whether when the present issue is framed mentioning the allegation of the title of the plaintiff also, the defendant asserts his own title and denied the plaintiffs and both the parties led evidence, can it be said that no prejudice is caused to the defendant if the decree for possession is based on proof of the title of the plaintiff?2. The facts of the case are that Gopal Lal plaintiff respondent filed a suit against Smt. Pushpa Sharma defendant appellant for ejectment of certain residential premises situated in Jaipur City. The suit w...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Bhangur Charitable Trust
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1986
Reported in: (1987)61CTR(Raj)57; [1987]164ITR249(Raj)
S.K. Mal Lodha, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following question for the opinion of this court, which is said to arise out of its order dated October 31, 1978, in WTA Nos. 252, 253 and 254/JP/ 1977-78: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee-trust was entitled to exemption of Rs. 1,50,000 under Section 5(1)(xxiii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, on shares of Indian companies held by it, in respect of the years under consideration ?'2. The assessee, M/s. Bangur Charitable Trust, Didwana, claimed exemption of Rs. 1,50,000 under Section 5(1)(xxiii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (No. XXVII of 1957) (for short 'the Act'), on the shares of various companies held by it. The assessment years under consideration are 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. The Wealth-tax Officer, Central Circle, Jodhpur, held that the exemption is not allowab...
Nemi Chand Garg Vs. Income-tax Officer, D-ward
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1986
Reported in: (1986)57CTR(Raj)164; [1986]161ITR500(Raj)
G.M. Lodha, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, filed by the assessee who is being prosecuted for offences under Sections 277 and 276C of the Income-tax Act, The gist of the offences is evasion of tax and making of false statement. Sections 276C and 277, Income-tax Act, 1961, read as under :'276C. Wilful attempt to evade tax, etc.--(1) If a person wilfully attempts in any manner whatsoever to evade any tax, penalty or interest chargeable or imposable under this Act, he shall, without prejudice to any penalty that may be imposable on him under any other provision of this Act, be punishable,-- (i) in a case where the amount sought to be evaded exceeds one hundred thousand rupees, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to seven years and with fine; (ii) in any other case, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three months but which may extend to three years and with...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Satya Narain
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)695
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. This State-appeal deserves to be accepted on a short point that case of adulteration of food-stuffs, the Magistrate was not justified in releasing the accused after imposition of fine, only. The case of food adulteration and that too, in oil, deserves to be seriously dealt with as it can spread serious health hazard and can become dangerous to the society.2. In the instant case, the respondent was prosecuted for the offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act on the allegation that the Food Inspector took the same of mustard oil on 28-8-1974 and on chemical examination that oil was found to be adulterated. The trial court found the respondent guilty for the offence under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act but, while hearing on the question of sentence observed that looking to the poverty of the accused-respondent and the fact that there was no foreign material in oil, it sentenced the respondent to a period of sentence till ...
Hardayal Mal Vijai Kumar Vs. Food Corporation of India
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-03-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)193
Kishan Mal Lodha, J.1. The defendant has filed this appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated January 21, 1975 of the Additional District Judge, Sriganganagar, by which the plaintiff-respondent's suit was decreed for Rs. 6650/-with proportionate costs against the defendant-appellant. The plaintiff was awarded future interest at rate of 6% p.a. on Rs. 6650/-. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for Rs. 10,950/-as damages for breach of contract and Rs. 1724.50 as interest thereon. The plaintiff is a statutory Corporation established under Section 3 of the Food Corporation Act, 1964. The defendant is a partnership firm. The defendant made an offer vide Ex. 4A on November 18, 1968 for the purchase of 1000 Qtls. of Gram at rate of Rs. 90.50 per quintal at scale point at CWC/RSWC or FCI Godown at Hanumangarh. The offer was accepted by the District Manager of the plaintiff, under his letter dated November 19, 1968 and the defendant was require...
G.S. Ratra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1986
Reported in: [1986]161ITR251(Raj)
P.C. Jain, J. 1. The question referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short), under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), as fashioned by the Tribunal, reads as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the use of the words 'service has been terminated' in Clause (ii) of Rule 8 of Part A of Fourth Schedule ofthe Income-tax Act, 1961, does not cover the case of termination of service by resignation by an employee ?' 2. Shortly put, the necessary facts leading up to the present reference by the Tribunal are that the assessee was employed with Oriental Power Cables Ltd., Kota, from the month of July, 1962, as Chief Engineer of the said company. In the year 1965, the management of the said company was changed and the new management appointed three more persons in a position superior to that of the assessee. Therefore, he was relegated to the fourth positi...
Nisar Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-02-1986
Reported in: (1987)59CTR(Raj)204; [1986]162ITR677(Raj)
1. This application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', has been filed by the petitioner, Messrs Nisar Brothers, Amer Road, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'). During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the assessee pressed the following four questions :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any material on record to sustain the finding of the Tribunal that the proviso to Section 145(1) of the Income-tax Act is applicable in the case of the assessee. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in making the addition of Rs. 30,000 in trading account and also sustaining the addition of Rs. 7,202 on account of the alleged sale and a further addition of Rs. 1,296 as profit thereon. 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any material on record to disbelieve the sworn statement of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »