Rajasthan Court August 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.
NaraIn and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)178
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. Appellants Gheesa and Narain along with eight others were tried for the charge Under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307, 323 read with 149 I.P.C. by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara. Vide judgment dated August 29,1985, eight accused were acquitted of the charges. Gheesa appellant was however held guilty Under Section 302/34 and 323/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 150/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo three months R.I. on the first count and three months R.I. on the second count. Narain appellant was held guilty Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 150/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo three months R.I. Gheesa and Narain have preferred this appeal against that judgment.2. The proseuction case was that P.W. 20 Sohan Singh, A.S.I, of Bigod Police Station had gone to Bigod from Police Chowki Barundi in connection with investigation of a case. While returning to the P...
Sultan and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)255
V.S. Dave, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Nohar on November 1, 1985 in Sessions Case No. 3/84 by which he convicted accused-appellant Sultan for offence Under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine two months' further rigorous imprisonment was awarded. He also convicted accused-appeallant Mani Ram for offence Under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment.2. Dogmatic attitude and intolerance for intercaste marriages resulting in brutal I murder of the younger sister Mst. Aashki aged 16 years, by caste Chamar and her boy friend Gulab aged 18 years by caste Mirasi is short and sad story of this case. On December 22; 1983 I at 12.30 P.M. a report was lodged at the police station Pallu, District Sri Ganganagar by Shanker...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Suman Rathi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-1990
Reported in: [1991]188ITR548(Raj)
K.C. Agrawal, C.J. 1. The assessee (Smt. Suman Rathi) filed a wealth-tax return declaring her net wealth at Rs. 5,76,500 on June 26, 1976. The Wealth-tax Officer found her wealth to be more than the returned wealth and issued a demand notice in the sum of Rs. 7,295. 2. Against the said order, the assessee went up in appeal which was dismissed on June 21, 1979. The matter was, thereafter, brought to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The point raised in the appeal was that the valuation of unquoted shares of M/s. Krishna Mills Ltd., Beawar, should be valued after deducting the gratuity liability. The appeal was partly allowed and the argument with regard to the valuation of shares was accepted holding that the gratuity liability was an ascertained liability and that it was to be deducted while valuing the unquoted shares of M/s. Krishna Mills Ltd. On reference being made by the Department, the question mentioned below was referred : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the...
Kanchan Steels Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: 1991(33)ECC271
1. K.K. Lohiya is a partner of the firm M/s. Kanchan Steels. It owns a factory at B-22, Industrial Estate, Kota, wherein tit produces hot/cold rolled Patti/Patta etc. as commonly known in the trade parlance, made out of the duty paid flats cuttings 10 mm in thickness covered under sub-item (i)(a) of T.I. No. 26 AA. The petitioner submitted the classification to the Assistant Collector (non-petitioner No. 2). The classification was approved by the Assistant Collector to be effective from 21-12-1982 under Tariff Item No. 26AA(i)(a) of the Central Excise Tariff. The petitioner was required by the Central Excise Dept. to pay duty. The petitioner paid duty. The same being in excess than what was due from it, a refund was claimed for the sum of Rs. 18,683.05. The Department preferred an appeal before the Collector asserting that the classification submitted by the petitioner was wrong and it had been erroneously approved by the Assistant Collector. The appeal is still pending, but to the pra...
Rajasthan State Road Trans. Corpn. Vs. Pista Agrawal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ890
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. The accident giving rise to this appeal took place at about 9.30 p.m. on July 16,1978 near Niros Restaurant on Mirza Ismail Road, Jaipur in which Girraj Prasad Agrawal, husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 died on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of bus No. RRG 1957 belonging to the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'). Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 are the father and mother of the deceased.2. A joint application for compensation was made by the heirs and dependants of the deceased Girraj Prasad Agrawal claiming Rs. 13,29,800/- as compensation. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur granted an award for Rs. 2,75,000/-. Against the said award two appeals were filed, which were numbered as Civil Misc. Appeal. No. 203 of 1981 and Civil Misc. Appeal No. 177 of 1981. The former appeal was filed for setting aside the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal by the Co...
Sardara Ram Dangi Vs. District Judge and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN441
M.C. Jain, J.1. This special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 1.9.90. where by the learned single Judge dismissed the appellant's writ petition.2. The appellant Sardararam Dangi was appointed as class IV servant on 16.5.80. He passed the 'Prathma' examination of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan in the year 1983 and that examination has been recognized or Government of Rajas than as equivalent to the Secondary Examination of the Board of Second any Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer vide Ex. 2. Rule 10 (2) of the Rajasthan Sub-ordinate Courts Ministerial Rules, 1986 provides Secondary or its equivalent qualification recognized by the State Government to be he qualification for the post of Lower Division Clerk, Upto 10% Class IV employee can be appointed as Lower Division Clerks in accordance with Circular of the High Court, if peons have put in five years service and possess the requisite qualification for appointment of the post of Lower Division Clerks. There is a...
Shanker and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN611
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21st September 1989 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharatpur in Sessions case No. 18/86.2. Broadly speaking, the facts of the case are that Karan Singh (PW 2) lodged a report at Police Station Sewar at 9.15 a.m, on 17th March, 1988 about an incident allowed to have taken place on the same day at 8.00 a.m. The prosecution case, as given out in the said report, is that the informant's son Tulsi had gone in Jangle to meet the call of nature and while he was returning, he was surrounded by the appellants and one Bhopal. Against the appellants a further accusation was also made that they caused injuries to Tulsi with spears on his chest, neck and lumber region. On account of the injuries sustained by him, Tulsi died. In the report it was also given put that on a noise, Amar Singh and Man Singh report witnesses came on the spot to rescue Tulsi but in the meantime other accused persons viz., Bhopal Singh, Bal...
Smt. Pephi Devi Vs. Legal Representatives of Sumer Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-22-1990
Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)336
Milap Chandra, J.(a) that writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs;(b) that rights title and interest of the petitioner so accrued vide Annexure 1 & 2 & 3 and she be Khatedar the said rights should be protected.(c) that an appropriate writ, order or direction be passed to restrain the respondents from disturbing peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land comprising of Khasra 284 Rakba 231/2 biswas situated in village Bapore, Tehsil & Distt. Nagaur as the petitioner has got Dhani in the field.(d) that other relief/reliefs with this Hon'ble court may deem just and proper be also passed in favour of the petitioner which is in possession of the land in question so that Justice could be muted out to her otherwise she would be debarred from her valuable rights.(e) that other relief/reliefs with this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper may kindly be granted.2. The petitioner has averred in her writ petition in short, as follows. Her husband late Pema Ram Nayak (Harijan) purc...
Anita Kothari Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN17
ORDER Heard counsel for both the sides. It appears that a similar matter has been disposed of by this court on August 24, 1987, in Writ Petition No 317 of 1987 wherein this court directed: After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we allow the writ petition and direct the respondents to continue the petitioners in service until persons regularly selected by the Punjab Service Commission are appointed to the posts presently held by the petitioners and join these posts. These petitioners who have been appointed to posts in leave vacancies will continue in these posts until the employees who have proceeded on leave return and join these posts. We dispose of this writ petition by adopting that order subject to one clarification that the State of Punjab would not be permitted to terminate the services of any of the petitioners by transferring a regular recruit from another institution to any institution where any of the petitioners may be serving. Termination would be valid only when d...
The Vidhyarthi Sanrakshan Samiti Vs. University of Jodhpur and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)WLN329
M.C. Jain, J.1. The Vidhyarthi Sanrskshan Samiti Jodhpur has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution Seeking relief against the University of Jodhpur that the students being the last batch under the old course having passed the Senior Higher Secondary Examination 1990, may be allowed admission in second year of three year degree old course in the year 1990-91. The petitioner samiti's case is that the students who have passed the Senior Higher Secondary Examination in the year 1990 were students of Higher Secondary, Secondary and 9th class in the Sessions 1988-89, 1987-88 and 1986-87 respectively. The students have thus studies under the old course. Having undertaken the old course and cleared the Senior Higher Secondary Examination in the year 1989-90, they are entitled to get admission in second year of three-year degree old course in the year 1990-91. Such students have been denied admission in the second year old course. According to the petitioner samiti, the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »