Rajasthan Court August 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.
Girdhari Lal Vs. Nagar Parishad and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj128; 1988(1)WLN68
ORDERInder Sen Israni, J.1. This is a revision petition under Section 115, C.P.C. against the order dt. 22-10-1981 passed by the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Bharatpur in Civil Suit No. 36/81 accepting the application of the non-petitioner 2 for impleading him as defendant in the suit.2. The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for issue of perpetual mandatory injunction against the Municipality, Bharatpur alleging therein that there was as Shanker Yyam Shalla owned and possessed by him since the time of his ancestors, in which the private deity Shivji, Bheruji, Hanumanji are situated. The Municipality, Bharatpur built a urinal in the portion of Vyam Shalla. Apart from this, the Municipality Bharatpur gave a notice to the petitioner dt. 21-1-81 asking him to demolish the room and chappal which stand in the Vyam Shalla contending that the land belongs to the Municipality. Therefore, it was prayed in the suit that a perpetual injunction-restraining the Municipality not to demoli...
Jagdish Prasad Vs. Principal, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj174
Byas, J.1. This appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against an order of a learned single Judge of this Court dt. Aug. 26, 1986, by which the appellant's writ petition, challenging his rustication from the Medical College was summarily dismissed.2. Facts, first the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') was a student of IX semester of M.B.B. S. Course in R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur. On May 23, 1986 he was served with an order Annexure-3 dt. May 16, 1986, by which the Principal rusticated him for one academicyear and was further expelled from the College Hostel permanently. The petitioner filed the writ petition challenging the impugned order Annexure-3 on many grounds, the principal being that it was passed without notice to him and without affording him any opportunity of hearing. The learned single Judge, looking to the repeated acts of gross misconduct, such as indiscipline, rowdism, theft, misbehaviour etc., as reveale...
Anandi Devi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: [1988]169ITR130(Raj)
1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, is to answer the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the minors received interest on their capital accounts and, therefore, the interest income was includible in the total income of the assessee within the meaning of Section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. Relevant assessment years are 1976-77 to 1978-79. The assessee claimed exclusion of the interest income received by the minors, Rajkumar and Mangilal, admitted to the benefits of partnership in the computation of the total income. It was contended by the assessee that the minors were not under any obligation to contribute to the capital of the partnership and, therefore, the interest income was their deposit. The Income-tax Officer rejected the contention. Ultimately, the Tribunal also has rejected the assessee's contention. It has b...
Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Bhoormal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: [1988]68STC280(Raj)
N.C. Sharma, J.1. M/s. Jai Hind Medical Store was a registered firm and a registered dealer under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (for short hereinafter 'the Act'). The dispute relates to the accounting period ending on Deepavali 1965, that is to say from November 4, 1964 to October 25,1965, relating to the assessment year 1965-66.2. The Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Ward-II, Sector-A, Jodhpur made assessment for the above accounting year on August 4, 1977, under Section 10 of the Act to the best of his judgment as the assessee did not appear in later part of the assessment proceedings. Mr. Bhoormal, partner of the assessee-firm, made an application to set aside the ex parte best judgment assessment on September 7, 1977, under Section 10-C of the Act. The ex parte assessment was set aside by the assessing authority on March 31, 1979. It was observed in that order that there had also been underassessment. Ultimately, on July 20, 1981, the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Ward...
Principal, Mayo College Vs. Labour Court
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ351Raj
P.C. Jain, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the award dated 21st October 1986, annexure 17, passed by the learned Labour Court, whereby the order of termination terminating the services of Bhanwar Singh, respondent No. 2, dated 13th August 1983, annexure 10, was set aside and he was reinstated with back wages.2. Put briefly, the facts of the case are that respondent No. 2, Bhanwar Singh, was employed as a probationer in the Mayo College, Ajmer, as class IV employee to fill the post of Chowkidar, vide order No. 1049 dated 11th December 1981, for a period of two years with effect from 1st January, 1982. Prior to this, Bhanwar Singh was kept on trial for a period of six months in place of his father. The case of the petitioner is that as Bhanwar Singh was not found suitable to be kept in the employment on permanent basis, due to his unsatisfactory work, his services were terminated, vide office order dated 13th August 1983, with effect from 30th September 1983, i....
Anwar Mohd. and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)445
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. Heard and perused the record. The police submitted the negative final report in the Court of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgath. On a protest petition filed by the complainant, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Section 406 IPC against the three accused-petitioners. It was open to the learned Magistrate to peruse the case diary and see whether an offence was prima-facie made out against the accused-petitioners or not. He bad powers to disagree with the conclusions of the Investigating Officer and to take cognizance of the offence. No. illegality has been pointed out in the impugned order by the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. It may be observed that it will be open to the accused-petitioners to put appearance in the Court below and contend before him that since no offence has made out, they should be discharged.3. With the above observations, this application under Section 482 Cr.PC is dismissed....
Lalu Ram Vs. Pitha Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)443
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. By this application under Section 482, Cr. PC the accused has challenged the correctness of the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Churu dated October 12, 1982, by which his revision against the taking of cognizance was dismissed.2. Briefly recalled, the facts are that Pitharam Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bigawas lodged a report at Police Station , Dungargarh on July 30, 1977 stating therein that in the night of July 28, 1977 the accused took away four she-buffaloes from the cattle-pond of the Panchayat. The police registered a case and after investigation, filed the final report stating therein that no offence was made out. The Sarpanch, feeling dissatisfied with the action of the police, presented a complaint in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ratangarh against the accused Laluram for offences under Sections 457 and 380, IPC. The learned Magistrate, after holding inquiry, took cognizance of the offence under Section 379, IPC and summoned the accus...
Chhittarpal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)429
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. By this application under Section 482 Cr. PC the accused challenges the validity of the order dated March 17, 1982 by which the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Binswara took cognizance of the offence under Section 161 IPC against him.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I have also gone through the case file.3. It was contended by Mr. Mathur at the thresh-hold of his arguments that the cognizance of the offence under Section 161 IPC cannot be taken against the accused without the requisite sanction under Section 197 Cr. PC or under Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. It was argued that the accused was a Veterinary Surgeon holding the gazetted post. Since no sanction was obtained, the action of the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence under Section 161 IPC is wholly illegal and unsustainable. The contention has considerable force.4. Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, ...
Subhash Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)530
Kishore Singh Lodha, J.1. The appellant Subhash has been convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to four years r.i. and a fine of Rs. 400/- by the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara by his judgment dated 13-6-1986. He has come up in appeal.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated here. Smt. Antar aged about 19 years in the second wife on one Nathu. Her husband is employed at Mahi Dam where as she used to live in her village Hariyapada. It is alleged that on 19-4-1985 she came to the village Kutumbi in order to take a bus to Mahi Dam via Banswara. She boarded a bus of which one Lala, co-accused was the cleaner (some time called conductor also) at Kutumbi and reached Banswara. She was made to get down at Banswara in the market and was not taken to the bus stand from where she was to get another bus for Mahi Dam. She however, managed to reach the bus stand at Banswara. There she found that the bus for Mahi Dam had already left. She, therefore, came back to the pla...
Babu Lal Vs. Surajmal Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)442
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. Heard and perused the impugned order as well as the record of the case.2. The police has submitted the negative final report in the Court of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Osian. The complainant lodged a protest petition. He was allowed time to adduce evidence. On 14-4-1980 neither the complainant nor his counsel put appearance in the Court of the Magistrate. The learned Magistrate heard the Assistant Public Prosecutor and perused the investigation diary and accepted the negative final report. Thereafter the complainant lodged a complaint against the accused for the same offence under Section 408 IPC in the Court of the same Magistrate. The learned Magistrate after making an enquiry took cognizance of offence under Section 408 IPC against the accused and issued process against him by his impugned order dated 29-5-1982. The accused has filed the present application for quashing the aforesaid order.3. It was argued by Mr. Nagori for the accused that t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »