Rajasthan Court February 1987 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Associated Soap-stone Manufacturing Co.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: [1989]178ITR272(Raj)
1. This is an application by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for directing the Tribunal to state the case and refer to this court for its decision, a question of law said to arise out of the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal rejected the application under Section 256(1) on the ground that no question of law arose out of its order.2. The assessee set up its claim in respect of interest paid to Shri Gurprasad which became payable as a result of an order dated February 26, 1971, passed by the High Court on the basis of a letter of its advocate received during the assessment year 1973-74. During the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1973-74, a conclusion was reached that the liability in respect of interest had become ascertained during the assessment year 1972-73, as a result of the High Court's order being passed during that period, and, therefore, merely on the basis of the advocate's letter intimating this fact subsequently, the same ...
Najar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN600
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated July 28, 1976, by which the appellants Najarsingh and Jagroopsingh were convicted under Sections 302, 307 and 148, I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, and accused Jeetsingh, Madasingh s/o Kartarsingh, Nichatarsingh and Madasingh s/o Surjansingh under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307, I.P.C. Each of them was sentenced to various terms, the highest being that of imprisonment for life under Section 302 or 302/149, I.P.C. The accused have come-up in appeal and challenge their conviction.2. PW 14 Gilasingh is the brother and PW 18 Hakamsingh is the father of the deceased-victim Neelasingh. They and the appellants are residents of 5-KK P.S. Gamurwali district Sri Ganganagar. Hakamsingh (PW 18), Kartarsingh, Mukhtiyarsingh and the appellant Najarsingh are urine brothers. Hakamsingh (PW 18) and the appellant Najarsingh had a common father Keharsingh by name. Kehar...
Mohan Lal Vs. Firm Devi Chand Nathu Lal Jawaria
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN617
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. Firm Devichand Nathulal filed a suit in Court of Civil Judge, Udaipur for recovery of Rs. 9866/- & obtained a decree from that Court against petitioner Mohanlal. In execution of that Decree, the decree-holder firm got attached house of the petitioner situated in village Bhabharana, Salumber Parsola Distt. Udaipur. In execution of the decree, the house of the petitioner was put to auction and after obtaining the permission of the Court, the decree holder also made the bid which was knocked down in his favour for Rs. 16351/- on 7th January, 1984. The petitioner judgment debtor filed objections before the executing Court stating that auction sale was irregular because the decree-holder and sale-ameen had joined hands. It was alleged that publication of the proclamation under Order 21, Rule 66, C.P.C. was not made according to law. The market value of the house was Rs. 50,000/- while the auction bid of the decree holder was only to the tune of Rs. 16351/- and the...
Najo Mal and ors. Vs. Daya Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN410
Jas Raj Chopra, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer dated 27-2-1980 whereby the learned Magistrate has ordered for the framing of the charges under Sections 323, 392, 147 and 114 I.P.C. against the accused-petitioners but he has discharged all the accused-petitioners of the offence under Section 504 I.P.C.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this revision briefly stated are: that on 19-10-1969, a death feast was arranged by the Ramani-Maheshwari family of Barmer. It is alleged that the non-petitioner Dayaram brought this fact to the notice of the Police as well as to the Sub-Divisional Officer and then accompanied them to the house of Premchand. There, the Police seized the cooked meals lying in the Nohra. Dayaram suspected that cooked meals were being taken out of the house. He complained about it to the Sub-Divisional Officer. When they went into the Nohra, it. is alleged that accused Gordhandas, Assand...
iswar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN704
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 4-8-78 passed by the Special Judge (Anti-Corruption Cases) Rajasthan Jaipur in Special Criminal Case No. 23/75 whereby, the accused appellant has been convicted under Section 161 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/- in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month. The appellant was further convicted under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and was sentenced to under go 1 year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/-in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month's simple imprisonment. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. A verbal complaint was lodged on 9-1-1973 at 10.50 a.m. by Mohamad Umar with the Addl. Superintendent of Police, Anti-corruption Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur. The complainant in his report stated that he was a auto-ricks...
Gir Raj Kishore Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN684
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Cases, Jaipur dated 23-1-1979 where by the accused appellant has been convicted under Section 161 I.P.C. read with Section 5(1)(d)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 161 I.P.C. and further sentenced under Section 5(1 )(d) & (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that PW 1 Harlal submitted a report (Ex.P 1) before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Corruption Department, Bharatpur on 12th July, 1975 at 9.30 a.m. alleging that he was resident of Pagor Nagla Lakhan and was a teacher. The accused appellant, who is Head Cons...
Ramesh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN161
Surendra Nath Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment passed by the trial court convicting and sentencing the accused appellant under Section 302 and 448 IPC.2. Rameshwar (PW 6) submitted a written report (Ex. P 5) to Station House Officer, Police Station, Mania, Dholpur on the basis of which FIR (Ex. P 7) was recorded at 10.15 p.m. In the report, it was mentioned that on that day at about 8 p m. in the evening, he heard some noise in the shop of Nawal Singh, so he along with Roshan Lal, Bhuri, Nawal Singh, Ram Prasad went to the spot, where Ramesh (accused appellant) with five other persons was beating Satish Chand Patwari (deceased) by 'Hathoda', Basuli' etc., thereafter, accused persons dragged Satish Chand towards their house. These persons intervened and took Satish to the Police Station. On the way, Satish Chand expired. A case was registered under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149 1PC. After usual investigation, the case was challaned in the court of Magistrate, who comm...
Udairam Vs. Lohro
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN522
Farooq Hasan, J.1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17-11-1980 passed by Civil Judge, Bharatpur (first appellate court) where by he confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Bayana on 2-9-1975.2. Brief facts giving-rise to this appeal are that the plaintiff respondents riled the suit with these averments that this Khan house covered with Chhappar is adjacent to the land occupied by the defendant-respondent. This land is situated in the northern side of the plaintiff's aforesaid house. It has been further stated in the plaint that the defendant-appellant had constructed a wall shown in red colour in the site plan (Ex. 1) and thereby obstructed the flow of rain water from his Chhappar towards the land over which the 'Nohra' of the defendant was constructed. The plaintiff-respondent further asserted that the aforesaid right to flow of rainy water from the Chhapar is an old one and thereby he acquired a right of ease...
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj105
ORDERKanta Bhatnagar, J. 1. The petitioners in all the writ petitions detailed in Schedule annexed with this order and forming part of it, in response to the advertisement by respondent 1, in the month of October 1986, inviting applications for admission to the General Nursing Course (for short 'the Course' hereinafter) in the State of Rajasthan submitted applications for being admitted to the Course at Barmer Centre. Not being selected for the course, the petitioners felt aggrieved and invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 2. Notices at the admission stage were issued to the respondents. Mr. L. S. Udawat, Additional Government Advocate appeared on their behalf. At the request of the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the urgency of the matter, the writ petitions have been heard for final disposal at the admission stage. As the points involved in all the writ petitions are common, I propose to dispose them of by one common order. 3. The facts relevant for the disposa...
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-20-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN110
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. The petitioners in all the writ petitions detailed in Schedule annexed with this order and forming part of it, in response to the advertisement by respondent No. 1, in the month of Oct., 1986, inviting applications for admission to the General Nursing Course (for short 'the Course' here in after) in the State of Rajasthan submitted applications for being admitted to the Course at Barmer Centre. Not being selected for the Course, the petitioners felt aggrieved and invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court.2 Notices at the admission stage were issued to the respondents Mr. L.S. Udawat, Additional Government Advocate appeared on their behalf. On the request of the learned Counsel for the parties and in view of the urgency of the matter, the writ petitions have been heard for final disposal at the admission stage. As the points involved in all the writ petitions are common, 1 propose to dispose them of by common order.3 The facts relevant for the disposal of the pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »