Rajasthan Court February 1990 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.
Moti Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-09-1990
Reported in: 1990(1)WLN610
N C. Sharma, J.1. Mst. Bhooli aged 30 years, widow of Deo Lal Mali, resident of village Kundi lodged a First Information Report on April 7, 1982 at 8 00 a.m. at Police Station, Nahargarh, District Kota regarding her having been raped by the appellant on April 3, 1982 at 7-8 p. m. The Officer-m-Charge, Police Station, Nahargarh filed a charge sheet against the appellant for offence Under Section 376, IPC in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Baran and, on committal of the case by him, the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Baran, by his judgment dated September 22, 1982, held the appellant guilty for offence Under Section 376, IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. The appellant convict has come in appeal to this Court.2. There are certain special features and peculiar circumstances in this case. Smt. Bhooli had stated that she was aged 30 years and was widow of Deolal deceased. She was living with her mother-in-law and her husban...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Modern Stone Traders
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: [1990]184ITR455(Raj)
1. Notices were issued to the assessee to show-cause as to why his application may not be admitted and disposed of. Notices have been served but nobody appears on behalf of the assessee. We have gone through the record of the case. In our opinion, the following question of law arises and we direct the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and to make a reference to this court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the view of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the assessee-firm has done business of transportation and, therefore, was entitled to depreciation on trucks at 40% as against 30% allowed by the Income-tax Officer ?' ...
Banwari Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)21
Mohini Kapoor, J.1. This is a third bail application moved by the petitioner in FIR No. 571/88 registered at Police Station Kotwali Alwar for the offences Under Sections 302, 307, 148, and 149 IPC. First of all it is necessary to give the history of the applications moved by the petitioner and the decisions taken on them. First bail application is registered at No. 182 of 1989 and when this was presented before the Stamp Reporter, he directed the concerned clerk to report. The report which was to be submitted by the concerned clerk was already cyclostyled on the form and to this he added a report by affixing a seal which says the following words: vfHk;qDr }kjk bl U;k;ky; es igys vihy is'k ugh dh x;h A This bail application was rejected on 27th Jan., 1989.2. A second bail application was moved on 5th april, 1989. In this bail application the Advocate gave a note that no such bail application had been filed previously. The concerned clerk also reported by affixing a prepared seal in the ...
Gopal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN93
N.C. Sharma, J.1. Appellant Gopal has been found guilty for the offence Under Section 328, IPC for administering poison or other thingh with intent to commit or to facilitate commission of an offence and has been sentenced by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Jaipur City by his judgment dated September 16, 1982 to rigorous imprisonment for a term of 2 1/2 years and also with a fine of Rs. 500/-. The convict has come in appeal to this Court.2 The prosecution case is that Abdul Mazid (PW 1) owned an auto-rickshaw. On August 5, 1981. Abdul Mazid had given his auto-rickshaw to Gopal for driving at 2 p.m. on August 2, 1981. At about 11 p.m., Abdul Mazid was standing near Rajmandir Cinema, Jaipur along with his two friends Ikrar and Sethi. The appellant was also there and he was nothing the numbers of the auto vehicles in the order in which they were to be hired by the customers. It was further mentioned that the appellant also drives the taxi held by Abdul Mazid Abdul Mazid instructed th...
S.K. Dutt Sharma Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN339
I.S. Israni, J.1. This D.B. Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 732/1979 dated April 3,1986 by which the writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed.2. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenge the validity of order (Annexure-14) dated September 21,1979 where by the petitioner has been removed from service as a measure of punishment in disciplinary proceedings initiated against him under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1958').3. It will suffice to state that the petitioner was a member of Rajasthan Administrative Service, having been selected for appointment in the said service in the year 1960. From June 1, 1966 to October 4, 1987, he was posted as Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Bhadra in District Sriganganagar. One Yashwant Singh lodged a written complaint...
Nirmal Marbles Ltd. Vs. Vivek Bhambhani and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1990
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)37
Milap Chandra, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Munsif, Banswara dated October 21, 1989 by which be has rejected the application of the petitioners moved Under Order 1, Rule 10, CPC for impleading it as a defendant in Civil Suit No. 74/89 Vivek Bhambhani v. State and Ors. The facts of the case giving rise to this revision petition may be summarised thus.2. The petitioner had applied for the grant of a mining lease near village Khema Tallai (Banswara). On August 11, 1987, the Mining Engineer. Udaipur granted permission area was demarketed and demarkation and other fees and advance dead-rent were deposited. The Director, Mines and Geology, Udaipur ordered not to grant the Mining lease for the said area as it was a grazing land. On March 28, 1989, the Mining lease of the aforesaid area was granted in favour of the non-petitioner. On knowing it the petitioner filled an appeal before the Additional Director, Mines, Udaipur. He issued notice the non...
Rajeev Kumar Vs. Dr. Kailash Nath Bhargava and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-1990
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)477
D.L. Mehta, J.1. Niceties of law, technicalities of law and the feeblity landlord in the administration of justice has led the people to think that the course are not the proper forum where justice can be delivered without delay, without costs in its proper time. Our retired Chief Justice and other Judge of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have observed that the surgical treatment is necessary for the improvement of the system.2. Courts are meant for justice and not for the benefit of those who want to get advantage out of the litigation. In the instant case, Mr. Ranjan appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the cumbersome provisions of withdrawal from the Treasury of the amount deposited by the tenant is not effective and the landlords are suffering a lost in the process of withdrawal. Judicial notice can also be taken of the fact that the amounts are not refunded for years together and there is a cumbersome provision. Land-lords feeling is that the paper of refund will not mov...
New Era Furnishers (P.) Ltd. Vs. Indo-continental Hotels and Resorts L ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-02-1990
Reported in: [1990]68CompCas208(Raj)
M.B. Sharma J.1. The respondent, Indo Continental Hotels and Resorts Ltd. (for short, 'the company'), was earlier known as S.B. Properties and Enterprises Ltd. All the properties of the erstwhile S.B. Properties arid Enterprises Ltd. have been taken over by the company. New Era Furnishers (P.) Ltd. (for short, 'Era Furnishers'), is a private limited company. Tenders were invited by S.B. Properties and Enterprises Ltd., as it then stood, for furniture, furnishing and interior decoration of roof-top restaurant 'Shivir' and 'Rana Sanga Bar' in Hotel Mansingh at Jaipur. Anil Verma were the interior designers and all instructions were taken from them. Later on, the work order was revised and a fresh letter dated August 16, 1987, revising the previous letter dated July 9, 1987, was issued. It was done by Shri Kamal Bajaj, Chief Engineer of Mansingh Hotel, Era Furnishers started the work and completed the same within time and according to the terms and conditions of the work order, the compan...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Umraomal Dhaddha
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-02-1990
Reported in: (1990)85CTR(Raj)91; [1992]195ITR738(Raj)
1. This is a reference application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act arising out of the following facts : The respondent, Umraomal Dhadda, is a wealth-tax assessee and deals in precious and semi-precious stones. The assessee filed his return for the assessment year 1975-76 declaring his wealth to the tune of Rs. 1,52,330. The assessee declared a profit of 20% in his trading account. The Wealth-tax Officer made the assessment relying upon Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules, vide annexure-1, dated December 27, 1979, but did not grant him exemption under Section 5 of the Wealth-tax Act. The assessee preferred an appeal and the first appellate court, vide annexure 2, dated October 21, 1980, accepted both the contentions of the assessee regarding non-applicability of Rule 2B(2) and also with regard to exemption under Section 5 of the Act. The Department preferred a second appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, wherein there was a difference of opinion between the two membe...
Ramesh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-02-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN43
M.B. Sharma, J.1. The main and important question in this revision petition which is directed against the order dated 14th Sept, 1989 of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hindaun, is as, to whether in proceedings Under Section 147 Cr. PC any interim order can'be made?2. Mewasi and others filed) an application Under Section 145 Cr. PC in the court of learned SDM, Hindaun where in it was stated that in village Dhandhawali there is a public pond in Khasra No. 893, present No. 1002 measuring two hactrea and since time immemorial the catties of the village were drinking water from the pond The non-petitioners (petitioner complainants) wanted to cultivate their fields from that pond and wanted to obstruct the cattle from drinking water. In safeguarding the pond, the petitioner wanted to make a wall around that pond. It was stated that in case the non-petitioners (petitioner here in) were successful in taking possession of the pond then the cattle of the villgge will be deprived of takin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »