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. Shah theatres (P.) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-12-1987
Reported in: (1987)67CTR(Raj)120; [1988]169ITR499(Raj)
1. In this reference, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in allowing a sum of Rs. 34,072 being the amount of interest paid by the assessee on moneys borrowed for the purpose of constructing a new cinema building called Mayank which was not brought into use in the accounting year under reference (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 2,740 beingthe amount of travelling expenses incurred for procuring loan for construction of Mayank cinema is allowable as a deduction ' 2. This reference relates to the assessment year 1976-77. 3. M/s. Shah Theatres Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') is a private limited company incorporated in 1962. It carries on th...
N.K. Baheti, Manager Vs. Sitaram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-12-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN511
Surendra Nath Bhargava, J.1. These five revision petitions arise out of a common judgment passed by the District Judge, Ajmer, dated 11-7-1986 in appeal under Section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act, against the order of the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, dismissing the applications of the non petitioner No. 1.2. Sitaram Verma, non petitioner No. 1 was employed by the petitioner in its factory at Ajmer. He was elected President of the Ajmer Oudhogik Karmchari Sangh in January, 1980 and was declared as a protected workman by order of the Regional Assistant Labour Commissioner, Ajmer, vide his order dated 10-6 1981. He was given a charge-sheet on 20-6-1981 and was also placed under suspension in contemplation of a departmental enquiry After holding enquiry, the Enquiry Officer found him guilty of the charges levelled and the enquiry report was submitted on 24-8-1981. The Disciplinary Authority accepted the finding of the Enquiry Officer and passed an order, dismissing the non-p...
Smt. Mohan Bai Vs. Smt. Jai Kishan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj22
ORDERN.C. Sharma, J. 1. This is a revision petition by Smt. Mohan Bai against the order of the District Judge, Udaipur dt. Mar. 10, 1986, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner Under Section 151 of the Civil P.C. on 29th June, 1982 in his Court for setting aside the final decree, which had been passed by the District Judge, Udaipur in the suit for redemption which had been filed by Jai Kishan since dead and represented by the non-petitioners.2. Facts leading to the filing of this revision petition are that Jaikishan had instituted a civil suit on Nov. 21, 1975 against the petitioner for redemption of mortgage of certain house property which had been usufructuarily mortgaged by him on May 16, 1953 after borrowing a sum of Rs. 2999/- from the petitioner. In the redemption suit, the plaintiff Jai Kishan had stated that he had allowed Smt. Mohan Bai, petitioner to expend amount to the extent of Rs. 2100/- in the said house. It was stated that the petitioner did not make additio...
Desraj Vs. Omprakash and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj154; 1987(2)WLN268
ORDERGuman Mal Lodha, J. 1. A Sin of non or late payment of rent under Section 13(4); may be due to poverty; negligence or deliberate; whether would create handicap limited to defenceless under Section 13(i)(a) or would make tenant completely unarmed and defenceless against all weapons in armoury of landlord for eviction under Section 13(1) as a whole, is the question in this legal cum socio economic debate?2. I have invited the Bar in general to enlighten me. Unfortunately, the response is limited even though the repercussions can be unlimited.3. And now traditional narrations,4. This is a revision petition under Section 115, CPC, against the order of District Judge, Alwar, passed on 13th Oct. '84, in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 149/83.5. It is common ground that from Oct. '81 to July '82, an amount of Rs. 26,00/- was deposited on 24th July, '82 and not by the 15th day of the next month. On the above premises, both the lower courts have found that the defence against eviction deser...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Spinning Accessories Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC90(Raj)
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This was initially a reference by the Tribunal for decision by this Court of the following question of law :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the transaction involving movement of the goods from Jaipur to Calcutta is liable to be treated as an inter-State sale for purposes of levy of sales tax under the Central Sales Tax Act ?2. By virtue of the newly substituted Section 16 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, as amended by the Amendment Act of 1984, this reference is now heard and disposed of as a revision.3. The material facts are these :The assessee is a manufacturer of wire cloth having its head office at Calcutta in the State of West Bengal and its factory at Jaipur in the State of Rajasthan. During the relevant period the assessee disclosed its inter-State sales to the extent of Rs. 25,67,633 and in addition it showed transfer of wire cloth valued at Rs. 2,75,800 from its factory in Jaipur to its head office at Calcutta. It claimed th...
Mevalya Vs. Chiman Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: 2(1989)WLN(Rev)420
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This revision is directed against the the trial court's order dated 19th August, 1982 by which a document has been adjudicated to be a sale deed and thereafter ten times penalty which is maximum permissible in law, has been imposed in addition to recovering of deficit stamp duty by the court itself.2. The only contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that in accordance with law the trial court have only impounded the document on finding that it was not duty stamped and thereafter it should have referred the matter in the Collector as required by the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act as amended in its application to the State of Rajasthan. The argument is that the trial court could not itself have exercised this latter function entrusted to the Collector by the relevant provisions of law. Reference is made particularly to Sections 33 and 38 of the Stamp Act.3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner has to be accepted. On reaching the conc...
Prema Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN597
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21-4-1982 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pali where by he convicted the accused appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months imprisonment. He also convicted the accused under Section 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment He directed that both the sentences shall run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that on 28-2-1980 Mst. Gajari wife of Amararam Gujar has filed a written report before the Sub-Inspector of Police, Balunda. It was stated that on 28-2-1980 some quarrel took place in the day between her and the wife of accused Pemaram. When accused came at house then his wife informed him about the so-called quarrel. Accused Pemaram got enraged and approached her husband and assaulted him with a scissor which is used for cutting the wool. Her moth...
Bheenv Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN241
Jas Raj Chopra, J.1. This Misc. Petition under Section 482/379 Cr. P.C. has been filed against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate. Nawa, passed on 8-4-1981 in Criminal Case No. 54/1981, State of Rajasthan v. Bheenv Raj. 2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that F.C. Zaffaru Khan, F.C. Chhotmal and F.C. Shahabuddin left Police Station Nawa on 27-2-1981 vide rapet No. 808. While doing 'gasth', they reached Loonva and there they had a night halt. On 28-2-81 at about 6.00 a.m. they were informed by a Mukhbir that Hernia and Mania, are in possession of an unlicenced gun. They, therefore, went towards the house of Hemla and Mania and met them in the house. Hernia was carrying a gun in his hand. The police party asked them whether they have got any licence, whereupon both the accused replied that they have no licence of this gun. It is alleged that the police party then asked them to accompany them to the police station along with the gun. They, then took them to b...
Fazru S/O Meerkhan Meo Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN616
Gopal Krishna Sharma, J.1. This petition under Section 482 is directed against the order of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Deeg dated 28-1-1987.2. A challan under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148 and 149, I.P.C. was pending before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Deeg against the petitioner and other persons. The evidence in that case was concluded on 22-8-1985 and the case was fixed for final argument on 29-8-1985. On this date instead of hearing final arguments, the learned trial Court suo moto modified the charges and ordered to frame charge substantively Under Section 307 & 302, I.P.C. This modification in the charge was not challenged by the accused persons and they agreed to it. Thereafter, on 29-8-1985 an application was moved by prosecution to examine Shivganesh as their witness. He was examined and the case was fixed for further cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses with regard to modified charge. The case was fixed for 27-1-1987 and on this date the prosecution wanted to examine ...
Mangi Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-11-1987
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN697
Inder Sen Israni, JJ.1. This is D.B. Criminal appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 5-8-1985 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk convicting and sentencing the accused appellants as under: MANGI LAL Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. Life Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo's 2 months Rigorous Imprisonment; Under Section 323/34 I.P.C. One year's RI; Under Section 325/34 I.P.C. Five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/- in default, one month's rigorous imprisonment; RA 1SAL: Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default two months RI; Under Section 325 I.P.C. Five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default, one month rigorous imprisonment; DURGA: Under Section 302/34 Life Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- in default two months rigorous imprisonment; Under Section 325 I.P.C. Five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- in default o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »