Rajasthan Court September 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.
Banwari Lal and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-27-1988
Reported in: 2(1988)WLN(Rev)428; 1(1989)WLN(Rev)364
Bhatnagar, J. 1. Petitioner Banwari Lal and others in the writ petitions mentioned in Schedule A are temporary cultivation lease holders (for short 'T. C. Lease Holders'hereinafter) in Gang Canal Area. They have felt aggrieved by the Order dt. Sept. 9, 1986 to the extent it provides for charging price at the market rate for permanent allotment in favour of T. C Lease Holders of Ganganagar district. 2. At the request of the learned Counsel for the parties, all the writ petitions, at whatever stage they might be were heard for final disposal. As the point involved, grievance expressed, prayer made and the relief sought in all the writ petitions are the same. We propose to dispose them by one common order. 3. The petitioners are temporary tenants of the lands described in the Land Allotment Register. The certified copies relating to each petitioner has been annexed with the writpetitions. It is Ex. 1 in Writ Petition No. 85/88. For other exhibits also, we would refer to the number of the ...
Kashi Ram Vs. Gauri Shanker and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)489
J.R. Chopra, J.1. This petition is directed against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ladnu dated 1410-1987, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the accused-petitioner for the offences under Sections 300 and 457 IPC.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this petition briefly stated are: that complainant-non-petitioner No. 1 Gaurishanker and accused-petitioners Kashiram, Brahmanand and Mst. Rukmani are the closest relations. Accused Kashiram is the real brother of complainant Gaurishanker and accused Brahmanand is the real brother's son of complainant Gauri Shanker and Mst. Rukmani is the real brother's wife of complainant Gauri Shanker. It is alleged that both the parties have an ancestral house belonging to Shri Motilal, father of Kashiram and Gaurishanker. This house is alleged to have been partitioned between the parties. Complainant Gaurishanker alleges that the room in dispute came to his share on the basis of a Wil...
State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Smt. Kanta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: I(1989)ACC211; (1989)IILLJ135Raj
A.K. Mathur, J.1. This is a Misc. Appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') filed by the State against the award passed by Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Jodhpur, in the compensation claim case No. 3-1985 awarding the compensation to the extent of Rs. 67,676 with the cost of Rs. 250.2. The brief facts giving rise to this civil misc. appeal are that a claim was filed by Smt. Kanta, wife of deceased Amar Singh, on the allegation that deceased Amar Singh was working under Assistant Engineer, Irrigation Survey Sub-Division, Balotra and Executive Engineer, Irrigation Field Investigation Division, Jodhpur. It is alleged that her husband deceased Amar Singh when he was posted at Balotra as a driver in the Field Investigation, was drawing a sum of Rs. 780/- one month. The Executive Engineer, Field Investigaton, Jodhpur, by his letter dated 14th December, 1984 directed him to attend the 8th Lok Sabha election along with vehicle ...
Budhar Lal Vs. Judge, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: [1989(58)FLR472]; (1994)IIILLJ91Raj
Milan Chandra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of the learned Judge, Industrial Tribunal, Jodhpur dated September 21, 1987, by which he overruled the objection of the petitioner that the Executive Engineer, P.H.E.D., Balotra (respondent No. 2) is not entitled to be represented before him by Miss Shanta Ozha, Advocate. The fact of the case giving rise to this petition may be summarised thus.2. The petitioner was in the service of the respondent No. 2. His services were terminated with effect from June 3, 1985. A reference under Section 10, Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was made by the State Government regarding this dispute. Miss Shanta Ozha, Advocate put her appearance on behalf of the respondent No. 2. The petitioner moved an application under Section 36(3) of the Act, objecting the representation of the respondent No. 2 by Miss Shanta Ozha, Advocate. After hearing the parties, the learned Judge, Industrial Tribunal, Jodhp...
Satramdas Mehta Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: 1989(39)ELT6(Raj)
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the Orders Annexures 0 and P dated January 1,1988 by which Indian Cur rency Notes amounting to Rs. 72,26,090/ were seized by respondent No. 3, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise & Customs Division, Udaipur under Sub-section (1) of Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') on the ground that the amount was sale proceeds of smuggled gold.2. In short, the events disclosed in the writ petition are as under :-That, petitioner No. 1 Satramdas is a silver trader carrying on that business inherited from his forefathers in the market of Udaipur for the last twenty years and is engaged In the forward trading business in silver. Petitioner No. 1 had taken 9.5 lakhs from his brother Manohar Lai on December 19,1987 and an amount of Rs. 1,30,000/ from his mother Ish wari Bai and grandmothe...
Rajasthan Pradesh Vaidya Samiti Through Its Secretary Kalyan Chand Pur ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)WLN553
M.B. Sharma, J.1. An identical question of law is involved in these writ petitions and it is as to whether even those who are having medical qualifications which include Ayurvedic qualifications although not included in the Second, Third or Fourth Schedule to the Indian Medical Central Council Act, 1970 (for short, the Central Act), have right to registration in grade 'A' or 'B' or have a right to practice Ayurvedic Indian System of Medicine? Item No. 25 of list III (Concurrent List) deals with Education, including technical education, medical education and universities, subject to the provisions of Entries 63, 64, 65 and 66 of List-I, vocational and technical training of labour. It will therefore be clear from the perusal of the aforesaid item 25 of List-Ill of the Constitution that the powers of the State Legislature and Parliament are concurrent but in case the Parliament has jurisdiction to legislate in accordance with entries 63, 64, 65 and 66 of List-I, and any legislature has be...
Nanda and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)WLN190
Shyam Sunder Byas, J.1. The eight appellant viz. Nanda, Madan, Prahlad, Birdhi, Manna, Ballabh, Khema and Surajmal have been convicted under Sections 302/149, 148 and 449 I.P.C., and each has been sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 302/149 I.P.C. and to various other terms of imprisonment under the remaining two sections by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1. Kota by his judgment dated May 31, 1988. They have filed this joint appeal and challenge their convictions.2. At about 1.30 p.m. on 5-3-1985 PW 1 Jamna Bai appeared at police station Kanwas, district Kota and verbally lodged report Ex. 1-1. It was stated therein by her that at about 8 or 9.00 on that day the appellants accompanied with Bhura and Ram Gopal went to the house of Shaitan situate in village Khodiya Khedi to find out whether Devi Lal was there or not Devi Lal was not found there. the culprits made an assault on Shaitan. Shatain took shelter in his house the culprits how ever did n...
United Commercial Bank Vs. Jagatia Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)390
P. C. Jain, J.1. This is a petition for winding up of the non-petitioner Company-M/s Jagatia Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd, filed by the UCO Bank.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner--UCO Bank is a nationalised Bank and the non-petitioner Jagatia Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd., is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (here in after referred to as the non-petitioner Company). The non-petitioner Company entered into a banking transaction with the Branches of the petitioner Bank at Bhilwara, Jauhari Bazar, Jaipur and Singapore and the Divisional Office at Jaipur. The non-petitioner Company requested the petitioner Bank for giving cash credit facility to it at Bhilwara Branch in the year 1983. This facility was sanctioned in the sum of Rs. 6 lacs. The non-petitioner accordingly executed necessary documents by way of security and collateral security for the purpose of payment of such outstanding as may remain unpaid. These documents were renewed o...
Hakam Chand and 6 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)418
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. Complaints under Sections 276B and 278 of the Income Tax Act have been filed against the accused petitioners by the Income Tax Officer before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Jaipur. Upon these complaints the Chief Judicial Magistrate has ordered the issue of non-bailable warrants for the arrest of these petitioners. The case of the department appears to be that the company M/s. Bedla Flour Mills and Allied Industries Private Limited failed to deduct tax at source on the interest paid by it to the Directors. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that what ever tax was due has been deposited before the presentation of the complaints, though in some cases the delay in deposit was from 4 to 16 months. The learned Sessions Judge while dealing with the bail applications observed that the tax had been deposited in 7 cases only but by showing challans the petitioners have been able to make out a prima facie case that tax has been ...
Raju Alias Pappu Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)403
Farooq Hasan, J.1. This criminal appeal has arisen out of the judgment dated 19-7-1980 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Dausa (Jaipur) whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced as under: 1. under Section 307 and 392, IPC to undergo 4 years' R.I. with a fine on each count- of Rs. 100/- in default, further one month's R.I.2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. How ever, the appellant was acquitted of the charge under Section 397, IPC, giving benefit of doubt by the trial Court.3. A First Information Report was lodged at the Police Station Dausa on 14-9-1979 on a statement (Parcha Bayan) of Mst. Laxmi Devi recorded at Government Hospital, Dausa by Munshi Singh, SHO, where in she (Laxmi Bai) gave out that on 14th September, 1979 evening on return from a tea-stall of her son, Mahesh Chandra, situated at Bhakri Mod (turn) when she reached near Sayaloo, a boy of 18-19 years old wearing pant and bushirt met her and told her as to why are vacating the stall, to which...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »