Rajasthan Court July 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.
Bhag Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-04-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)475
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. Bhagsingh has filed this appeal against the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge, Udaipur dated 10-7-1978 by which he has been convicted for offence under Section 304, Part-II, IPC and sentenced to four years' R.I. with a fine of Rs. 1000/-.2. On 29-9-1977 at about 6-7 a.m. one Kishore went to graze his oxen in the fields. When the oxen had grazed for some time, the accused who were nine in number reached the field with lathis in their hands and asked Kishore why oxen were being grazed there. Kishore asserted that the field was purchased by him.3. This led to beating of Kishore with lathis by accused. Kishore then went to his village and came back to field with his brothers Deva and Uda. Deva and Uda reiterated that the field belonged to them. The accused then attacked Deva and Uda. Kishore raised an alarm. Deva succumbed to injuries as Deva and Uda both were injured.4. After usual investigation, challan was filed and the accused, 12 in number were charged for th...
Gudmal Matoliram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1986
Reported in: [1988]170ITR66(Raj)
1. As three reference applications relating to the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 have been referred for disposal by this court in which identical questions of law arise, the office is directed to register the reference application for the assessment year 1967-68 as 14 of 1976, for the assessment year 1968-69 as 14(a) of 1976 and for the assessment year 1969-70 as 14(b) of 1976. All the three reference applications are disposed of by one single order.2. The Income-tax Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that no appeal lay against the order under Section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'3. The brief facts of the case are that M/s Gudmal Matoliram (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) had claimed for itself the status of a firm, evidenced by a partnership deed dated April 1, 1965, drawn up on April 5, 19...
Lake Palace Hotel Private Limited and anr. Vs. State of Rajastna and o ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)WLN580
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. These are three petitions. Petitions Nos. 121 and 142 of 1986 were already listed before this Court and on the joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, the third petition No. 120 of 1986 was also got listed, as the point involved in all the three petitions is the same, and all of them relate to the validity of the reference made by the Additional District Magistrate-cum-City Magistrate, Udaipur on March 27, 1986, to the Additional District Judge, No. 1, Udaipur.2. The present is a very unfortunate litigation where the property of late Maharana Bhagwat Singh of Udaipur is the subject-matter of internal feud between the two sons and their mother. In Rajasthan area, there are three house-properties viz. (1) Shambhu Niwas Palace; (2) Fateh Prakash Palace having ground-flooor Darbar Hall; and (3) Shivniwas Palace, and the bone of contention is about the ownership, acquisition, and possession and other ancillary rights to the above properties.3. It is not n...
The Lake Palace Hotels and Motels Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur Vs. State of Raja ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-02-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Raj8; 1986(2)WLN444
ORDERM.C. Jain, J.1. This writ petition can be disposed of on a very short point regardingthe invalidity of the notification dated February 9, 1979 (Annx. 3). However, a few relevant facts may briefly be stated.2. There is a 'Jag Mandir Palace' situated in Pichhola Lake in Udaipur City. In the year 1962, Maharana Bhagwatsingh, Ex-Ruler of Mewar sold Jag Mandir Island along with Sister-Island Jag Niwas and other properties to the petitioner-company by means of a registered sale-deed. The Government of Rajasthan published a notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Rajasthan Monuments, Archaeological Sites and Antiquities Act, 1961 (Act No. 19 of 1961) in the Rajasthan Gazette dated January 12, 1967 proposing to declare, inter alia, Jag Mandir Palace, Udaipur as a protected monument. The Jag Mandir was mentioned at S. No. 187 in the said notification with the following description in column No. 5. The relevant part of the notification (Annx. 2) reads as under : --'EDUCATION ...
Girraj Prasad and ors. Vs. Nandoo
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-02-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Raj184; 1987(2)WLN585
S.N. Bhargava, J.1. This is defendant's second appeal against the judgment and decree passed by Civil Judge, Bharatpur by which he had dismissed the appeal filed by Chameli against the judgment and decree of Munsiff Bayana and the appeal filed by Shri Handoo was accepted and the suit of the plaintiff was decreed.2. The plaintiff respondent No. 1 brought the present suit for declaration, injunction and possession in respect of a portion of a house situated at Bayana on the allegations that the said house belonged to his father Kishorilal who died on 27th April, 1956. Since he is the only heir of his father, he becomes the owner of the suit property after the death of his father Kishorilal. It has been further alleged in the plaint that Chameli, appellant No. 1 who is the grand mother of the plaintiff and widow of Kanhaiyalal was staying in the suit property since the time of his father and she started claiming to be the owner of the property w.e.f. 5-12-1962 when she allegedly executed ...
Gordhan and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-02-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ541; 1986(2)WLN453
S.S. Byas, J.1. The appeal is directed against judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner dt. Oct. 23, 1975, by which the six accused, namely, Gordhan, Basta Ram, Ramlal, Kishna Ram, Hanuman Ram and Ram Chandra were convicted Under Sections 302/149, 148 and 323/149, I.P.C and each was sentenced to imprisonment for life on the first count and six months' rigorous imprisonment on the remaining two counts. The sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Put briefly, the prosecution case is that the deceased Balusingh Rajput was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Udasar P.S. Nokha district Bikaner. Accused Gordhan was a Panch in the Gram Panchayat. Five members of the Panchayat were on the side of accused Gordhan while seven members of the Panchayat were the supporters of the deceased-victim. As a result, two parties came to be formed in village Udasar - one headed by the deceased-victim and the other headed by the accused Gordhan. The State of Rajasthan allotted a major portion of pas...
Phoola Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-02-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)435
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. Phoolaram has filed this appeal against the judgment dated July 21, 1978 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh whereby he convicted the appellant under Section 304, Part II, IPC and sentenced him to six years rigorous imprisonment.2. According to the prosecution on August 15, 1976 at 11.00 a.m. accused-appellant Phoolaram lodged a report at P.S. Rawatsar that his father had died 15 years back leaving him behind as his eldest son. The deceased Khayaliram developed illicit relations with his mother and sister Mst. Teja for the last 6/7 years. The accused-appellant had asked the deceased that he should stop coming to his house but the deceased insisted for it. It is alleged that on the intervening night of August 14/15, 1976, the accused-appellant and his father-in-law Roodram were sleeping in the court-yard. The accused got up at 6.00 a.m. and went inside the house. On opening the door, he found the deceased sleeping there. He was seriously provoked. He p...
Magiya Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-02-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)587
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. Magiya has filed this appeal against the judgment dated August 11, 1978 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sirohi, by which he convicted the accused-appellant under Section 376, IPC and sentenced him to five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of four months.2. The prosecutrix Mst. Kasu was only nine years of age when she was ravished by the accused, who is alleged to be of 40 years of age. According to the medical evidence, such injury can be caused by fingering also if the finger has got nails, as there was lacerated wound on posterior fornix of vagina. It was swollen but not ruptured. PW 7 Dr. S.P. Purohit has testified that there was lacerated wound on left side of vagina adjacent to hymen and fresh blood was oozing out. According to the medical evidence, forcible sexual intercourse was committed with the girl within six hours of her medical examination. There was anoth...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Beecham Ores and Minerals and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-01-1986
Reported in: [1987]64STC12(Raj)
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. This application was moved under Section 15(2)(b) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act' for directing the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan to state the case and to refer this Court the question of law arising out of its order dated 30th March, 1978. During the pendency of this application the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984 (Act No. 20 of 1984) was enacted whereby the provisions of Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act were substituted and instead of reference to this Court a provision was made for revision by the High Court in special cases. By Section 13(10) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984, it was provided that every application under Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) of Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act pending before the High Court on the date of coming into force of the said amendment shall be deemed to be an application for revision under Section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales ...
Hari Ram and Dana Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-01-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)WLN470
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. Since Mr. Mathur, after arguing the case on merits for some time has ultimately prayed for reduction of the sentence, it is not necessary to either mention facts nor it is necessary to discuss the variousfacts of the case in detail.2. Mst. Jethi is alleged to be the legally married wife of Jalurarn brother of Harjram. The death of Jalurarn resulted in customary 'nata' with Hariram, his brother. The dispute was that inspite of that Gangaram, took her away. First Hariram obtained a warrant under Section 100 Cr.PC and secured her release in 1976. It was then the turn of Gangaram who obtained warrant under Section 97 Cr.PC for search of house of number of persons including Hariram, Danaram and others.3. On May 31, 3977 armed with this warrant, S.H.O. Shambu Singh of Sardarsahar accompanied by complainant Gangaram went to search these houses. On making search, Mst. Jethi could not be found. However, Gangaram was not allowed to go unscratched and he was attacked and bea...