Rajasthan Court September 1989 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.
Jai Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN302
G.K. Sharma, J.1. With the consent of both the learned this appeal is decided at this stage.2. Jai Chand has preferred this appeal against the judgment on 27-3-1989, by which, the Addl. Sessions Judge, No. 2, Ajmer convicted him Under Section 8/17 of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to 10 years' RI and a fine of Rs. 1 00,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further under go two years simple imprisonment3. Himmat Singh ASI Police Station Ganj, Ajmer was on gust along with other Constables. He got an information that Jai Chand is selling her in at a particular place On this information Himmat Singh reached there and apprehended the appellant and on search ten bottles of her in containing powder type material were found in this possession along with a sum of Rs. 219/-. The material along with the bottles was seized at the spot, sealed them, arrested the appellant and brought him to the Police Station. After completing the trial challan against the appellant was filled in the Court of Se...
Mahant Dhangir Vs. Janki Das
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN504
K.S. Lodha, J.1. Since these two applications arise out the same judgment, they are being disposed of by a common order. These are two applications under Articles 133 and 134A of the Constitution praying for a certificate that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance and requires decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court arising out of the decision of this Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 20/75.2. We have heared the learned Counsel for the parties.3. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. M.M. Vyas appearing for Jankidas Mohanlal, the non-petitioners in both these cases. It has been urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that under Article 134A a certificate can be issued by this Court as envisaged in Article 132(1) or 133(1) or 134(1) either of this Court deems it fit on its own motion or if an oral application is made by or on behalf of the party aggrieved immediately after the passing or making of such judgment, decree, final order or ...
Mahavir Prasad and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN573
Farooq Hasan, J.1. These five criminal miscellaneous petititions land themselves support to disposal by a common order having been filed by three petitioners, namely Mahavir Prasad, Mohd. Nasir s/o Mohd. Hussain & Mohd. Nasir s/o Haji Abbas in different sets seeking relief for grant of bail and quashing criminal proceedings in Cr. Case No. 140/80 arising out of FIR No. 7/89 of Police Station Karanpur.2. Brief facts giving rise to these petitions are that on 17th January, 1989, at about 9 p.m the Superintendent of Police, Sri Ganganagar, gave a written direction to the Assistant Superintendent of Police (Circle Officer), Sri Karanpur, informing that near about Indo-Pak Border village Bhutiwala 24-0, a large consignment of heroin apart from gold is likely to be smuggled in India. The Police party is alleged to have accordingly made arrangements so as to keep strict reconnaissance on the border; and at about 11 p.m. the police party laid by Dalpat Singh Dinkar, Assistant Superintendent of...
J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. the Municipal Board of Nimbahera and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-13-1989
Reported in: AIR1991Raj1; 1990(1)WLN689
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 9-1-87 whereby, the writ petition was dismissed. 2. The appellant M/s. J. K. Synthetics Limited challenged the notification dated 13-2-84 (Annx. 8) published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated 15-3-84 issued under Section 4(1)(b), (c) and (d) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1950, whereby, the Municipal Area of the Nimbahera Municipality was extended. The petitioner sought a declaration that the said notification is illegal and without authority of law and be quashed and octroi realised by the Municipal Board, Nimbahera be ordered to be refunded and the Municipal Board be restrained from realising any octroi duty from the petitioner company. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid notification on the ground that the objections filed by the petitioner-company were not considered properly and were disposed of without application of mind in utter disregard of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as no spe...
Man Industrial Corporation Vs. Superintendent, Central Excise, Mor and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1989
Reported in: 1991(34)LC572(Rajasthan)
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. Man Industrial Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner Company') is engaged in manufacture of bars, rods, sections, squares, forgings, etc. and for that purpose it uses sled ingots produced with the aid of electric are furnace.2. The petitioner Company was required to pay excise duty amounting to Rs. 3,60,787.13 P. on the products manufactured by it. The case of the petitioner is that the said products were exempt from the said duty and the petitioner Company was not liable for the same. The Allahabad High Court in Bansal Steelsons Co. Private Lid. v. Union of India and Ors. 1974 A.L.J. 350 : Cen-Cus June 1974, Page 1 has held that no difference could be made between ingots received from the large steel plants and ingots received from Mini Steel Plants and the exemption from excise duty granted under notification dated 30th November, 1963 read with notification dated 1st March, 1969 and 20th April, 1969 was applicable in respect of products manuf...
Bhanwar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)WLN710
V.S Dave, J.1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2), Cr.PC challenging the conviction and sentence passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Beawar on 30-6-1989 in sessions Case No. 18/88, State v. Bhanwar Singh and Anr in a case under Section 17 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985(here in after referred to as 'N.D.P.S. Act') Each of the accused-appellant was sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default of payment of which each of them was ordered to further under one years, imprisonment.2. This appeal came ta be heard at a very early date because while hearing the bail application it was directed that record be sent for and appeal be heard as soon as record is received. Hence it was heard out of turn on proiority basis also because accused are in jail.3. Briefly stating the facts giving rise to this appeal are that Shri Bherulal Sharma (PW 8) who was SHO, Police Station, Masuda received an information from a...
Kamal Engineering Works Vs. Ashwani Kumar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)WLN534
S.N. Bhargeva, J.1. These two revision petitions have been fifed against the order dated 25-8-1987 passed by the Additional District Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, by the plaintiff, asking the plaintiff to file additional court fees. These two revisions arise out of similar facts and circumstances and involve common questions of law and, therefore, are being disposed of by this common order.2. The plaintiff-petitioner filed to separate suits for specific performance of agreement dated 21-3-1983 and permanent injunction against the defendants Before filing the written statement, the defendants filed separate applications Under Section 11 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 (here in after referred to as the 'Court' Fees Act') and under Order 7 Rule 10, CPC. The trial court decided these applications vide its impugned orders dated 25-8-1987 accepting the applications and asking the petitioner-plaintiff to pay the additional court fees. It is against these orders tha...
Pukh Raj and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1989
Reported in: 1989WLN(UC)344
Farooq Hasan, J.1. In the above mentioned both the miscellaneous petitions a common question of law is involved so both the miscellaneous petitions are being disposed of by a common order. More over the cases have been registered against the petitioners who are common in the petitions alleging in the complaint that the shop of the petitioner was inspected twice in a day and contravention `of the act was alleged on this ground also both these petitions are disposed of by a common order.2. These miscellaneous applications are filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in criminal case No.l 154/87 and 1153/87 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali.3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that Inspector. Weight and Measures, Pali inspected the country liquor shop of petitioners situated at Pali on 17 6-1987 and found that liquor sold in the bottles was not in standard measurement. Hence, contravention of Sections 32 and 7/23 of the Weight and Mea...
Brij Lal Mehta Vs. Kamal Meena
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-12-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)WLN474
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. This petition under Section 482. Cr.PC is directed against the order dated 22-12-1988 passed by the Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Gangapur City. It may be stated that 3 matters have been decided by this order but the accused petitioner is challenging that part of the order by which he has been directed to produce an ox in the court.2. The complainant non-petitioner filed a report at the Police Station that his ox had been stolen. After investigation a final report was given. The non-petitioner filed a complaint and on this complaint, the court has taken cognizance and at the same time it has ordered that the ox should be produced before the court. It may be stated here that the case of the accused-petitioner is that the ox in question was purchased by him from the complainant.3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that under the provisions of Section 91 Cr.PC a direction to produce a document or any other thing cannot be given to an accused p...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. J.K. Industries Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-11-1989
Reported in: AIR1991Raj45; 1991LC284(Rajasthan); 1990(49)ELT512(Raj); 1990(1)WLN675
1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the Judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court dated August 7, 1989 (in M/s. J.K. Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2012 of 1985, published in 1986 RLR at page 831), whereby the learned single Judge has held that the Government is bound by the principles of promissory estoppel and, therefore, he has quashed the notificationNo. 159/85.CE (Annexure-P) dated July 15, 1986 issued by the Government of India.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are: that the Country felt great shortage of tyres between the years 1974-76. On account of this acute shortage, the tyres were sold in the market at a premium of 140% to 150%. The tyre-production was controlled and confined to only seven old established tyres Com-panics. Four companies belonged to multinational group viz., Dunlop, Firestone, CEAT, and Goodyear Indi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »