Rajasthan Court March 1988 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.
Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)411
J.S. Chopra, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Merta dated 22-11-1978 where by the learned Sessions Judge has held the accused-appellant Narayan guilty of the offences under Sections 376 and 451 IPC and has sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment on the first count and to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment, on the second count. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are: that Mst. Koyali wife of complainant Tulchharam, on 23-10-76 at about 9 a.m. went to her Bada to collect cowdung and to give fodder to the animals. It is alleged that accused Narayan who is the real brother-in-law of Tulchharam's sister entered the Bada and finding Mst...
Abdul Quddoos Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN455
Chopra, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption Cases, Rajasthan, Jaipur dated 30 6-1976 whereby the learned Judge has held the accused-appellant guilty of the offence under Section 5(1)(d)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 IPC and has sentenced him to two and half years rigorous imprisonment on the first count together with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo 5 months rigorous imprisonment and to a sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment on the second count. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. This appeal was earlier decided by this Court vide its judgment dated 15-1-1986 but on a petition for special leave filed before their Lordships of the Supremre Court, the judgment of this court was set aside and the case was remanded for re-hearing. Hence this appeal, comes up for decision after re-hearing.3. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal brief...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Western Indian State Motors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-11-1988
Reported in: (1988)70CTR(Raj)46; [1988]174ITR116(Raj)
JAIPUR BENCHThis is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue to answer the following question of law, namely :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that interest paid by the assessee to the sales tax department on the arrears of sales tax was an admissible deduction under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'The relevant assessment year is 1974-75. The assessee derives income from the sale of motor vehicles. It also has income from the sale of petrol and petroleum products. During the previous year pertaining to the relevant assessment year, the assessee paid a sum of Rs. 41,010 as interest to the sales tax department on the arrears of sales tax due to the department the assessee claimed deduction of this amount paid as interest on the sales tax arrears as expenditure laid out wholly for the purpose of the business on the basis that it was a permissible ...
The State Vs. Gani Mohammad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ742; 1988(1)WLN721; 1988(2)WLN179
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. This is an appeal by the State of Rajasthan under Section 377 of the Cr.P.C, and is directed against the judgment of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balotra dt. Aug. 22, 1986 directing that the respondent Gani Mohammad be released on probation on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1000/- to maintain peace and be of good behaviour for a period of one year under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offender's Act, 1958 instead of sentencing him despite holding him guilty for the offence under Sections 26-A, 41 and 42 of the Rajasthan Forest Act.2. Facts in brief are that the Regional Forest Officer, Balotra filed a criminal complaint for offence under Sections 26A, 41 and 42 of the Rajasthan Forest Act against the respondent with the averments that while checking on July 2, 1985 at 4.00 a.m., he found one Nissan Truck bearing registration No. RJC 1463 loaded with 25 quintals wet and dry wood which was found to have been taken and loaded from...
Poona Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-10-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)WLN168
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. This is a petition by Poona Ram under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing the order of the Sessions Judge, Pali dated January 23, 1981 and that of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali dated April, 30, 1979 and for directing the payment of the cost price of the wheat or to deliver the same to the petitioner without recovering any rent or warehouse charges from the petitioner.2. Facts leading to the filing of the petition are that on July 20, 1974, the Enforcement Inspector, Sumerpur filed a criminal complaint in Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali against Vanechand and Poona Ram with respect to the offence under Section 3(d) read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for contravention of the provisions contained in Clause 15(2) of the Rajasthan Wheat (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1973. It was alleged in the criminal complaint, that Shri Radheyshyam, Enforcement Inspector, Sumerpur on July 11,1974 went to village Bakli and made a search of the No...
Prem Devi and ors. Vs. Sohan Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-09-1988
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN684
N.C. Sharma, J.1. This judgment will decide Civil Second Appeal No. 284 of 1976 filed by the legal representatives or original defendants, Civil Second Appeal No. 315 of 1976 filed by Sohan Lal plaintiff and Civil Execution Second Appeal No. 2 of 1977 filed by the legal representatives of defendants-judgment-debtors together as they arise from the same Civil Original Suit No. 42 of 1967 instituted by Sohanlal plaintiff in the court of the Munsif, Nathdwara.2. Facts leading to these three second appeals are that on February 13, 1967 Sohan Lal plaintiff instituted Civil Original Suit No. 42 of 1967 against Manohar Lal defendant (since having died) with the averments that the plaintiff owned and possessed a three-storeyed house situated in Mohalla Nai Haveli in the town of Nathdwara. The agricultural land of defendant Manohar Lal was immediately adjoining the northern wall of the plaintiff's aforesaid house. There were three ancient windows, one 'teer kas' and two spouts in the first stor...
Shyam Sunder Vs. Roopkanwar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1988
Reported in: AIR1990Raj28
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendant-tenant against the decree of the Additional District Judge No. 1. Jodhpur, passed in Civil First Appeal No. 13 of 1985 on Oct. 21, 1986 affirming the decree dt. Jan. 22, 1985 passed by the Additional Munsif No. 1, Jodhpur for ejectment of the appellant from the premises detailed and described in para 1 of the plaint of Civil Suit No. 314 of 1977 instituted by the respondent-landlord against the former. It was not in dispute between the parties that the defendant-appellant was tenant of the respondent in a 'malia', and Saal over it with front 'dagla' situated in Kapra Bazar, Jodhpur and that the appellant carried on his vocation under the name and style of Modi Radio Service in the said premises. The dispute between the parties was about the rate of rent of the premises stipulated between them and with regard to the date from which the rent was due against the appellant. According to the respondent landlord, the suit pr...
J.K. Synthetics Vs. Municipal Council, Kota
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Raj51; 1988(2)WLN487
N.C. Sharma, J.1.This second appeal is directed by the plaintiff-Company against the decree of the Additional District Judge, Kota, dated May 7, 1976 whereby the decree of the Munsif (South) Kota, dated December 16, 1974, dismissing the suit of the plaintiff-Company for permanent injunction as against the respondent was confirmed.2. Facts leading of the filing of the second appeal are that M/s. J. K. Synthetics Ltd., Kota, is a public limited company, with its factory at Kota. The plaintiff-Company, manufactures nylon yarn in its factory. The nylon yarn manufactured is winded around the metallic cops and the nylon yarn is sent in this state outside municipal Limits of Kota to its customers. According to the plaintiff-Company, the purchasers of nylon yarn after using the yam return the cops to the Company. The returned cops are again utilised for winding up the nylon yarn for re-sale of the yarn. It was pleaded that it is a condition of sale with the customers that they would return the...
Pirag Chand Vs. Firm Ramlal Channanmal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Raj201; 1988(1)WLN681
ORDERJasraj Chopra, J.1. This revision arises out of an order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar dated 18-8-87 whereby the learned trial court has dismissed the application of the petitioner filed und under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are: that the plaintiff firm Ramlal Chananmal of. Sri Ganganagar filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 35360A against defendant firm Kailash Flour Mill & Oil Mill and the petitioner Shri Pirag Chand on the ground that defendant 2 Pirag Chand gave out himself, as the owner and partner of this shop and it is the defendant 2 who has entered into some contracts with the plaintiff firm prior to 17-4-78 and on that day, after settling the accounts, he executed a 'Rukka' in favour of the plaintiff for an outstanding amount of Rs. 26000/. It is, therefore, claimed that the plaintiff is entitled to recover this amount along with interest from the defendants.3. The s...
Prabhu Chawla and ors. Vs. Shivnath Soni and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-08-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)398
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. In this revision petition the scope and meaning of some person aggrieved' in Section 199 Cr.PC is to be examined. The Additional C.J.M, Kota, has taken cognizance, upon a complaint, tiled by the non-petitioner Shri Srinath Soni, who is the President of Instrumentations Workers Union (Intuc) Kota, for the alleged defamation of the President and the Prime Minister of this Country An article published in the Hindi version of 'India Today' dated 28th February, 1987, under the heading 'Khatarnak Takrav' is the writing on basis of which the petitioners, who are the Senior Editor, Chief Editor and the Printer of the magazine, are being proceeded against for the offences under Sections 500, 501 and 502 IPC.2. By this order it is not to be decided whether the words written in the article amount to defamation or not, so the contents may be seen in brief only. The President of India is said to be merely a Rubber Stamp and the Prime Minister is said to be an inexperienced perso...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »