Rajasthan Court January 1991 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.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Smt. Ivan Lodrix and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: I(1991)ACC434
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. This appeal (Appeal No. 99 of 1986, connected with Appeal No. 101 of 1986) arise from the award given on 24-1-1986 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, in Motor Accident Case Nos. 374 and 375 of 1983.2. On 7-11-1983 one Christopher Lodricks was going on his scooter from Ajmeri Gate to Sawai Man Singh Hospital. Smt. Yvonne (Evan) Lodricks was the pillion rider on the aforesaid scooter. The claimants alleged that when they reached at the Tiraha of Ashok Marg, near Maharani College, Jaipur, a car bearing number RST 549 came from the opposite direction and collided with the scooter; as a result of the accident B. Cristopher died at the spot; whereas the pillion rider sustained injuries.3. Claiming that the car, driven by Om Prakash, was being rashly and negligently, which struck the scooterist on the wrong side. Mrs. Yvonne (Evan) Lodricks and Miss Christeen Lodricks (claimants-respondents in Appeal No. 99 of 1986) filed a claim petition to recover compensatio...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jaipur Oil Products P. Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: [1994]206ITR90(Raj)
M.B. Sharma, J.1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), with a prayer that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal may be asked to state the case and refer the question of law framed in paragraph 5 of the petition to this court for opinion. The question which has been framed and which is sought to be referred is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the case of the assessee-company, which is maintaining its books of account on mercantile system, the sum of Rs. 26,08,065 which was written back and credited to the profit and loss account could not be taxed in its hands under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The dispute relates to the year of assessment 1981-82. A return showing loss of Rs. 61,58,505 was filed by Jaipur Oil Products (P.) Ltd., the assessee, non-petitioner herein. In response to a notice under Sections 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act, ac...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jaipur Oil Products (P) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: (1991)100CTR(Raj)303
M. B. SHARMA, J. :This is an application under s. 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) with a prayer that the ITAT may be asked to state the case and refer the question of law framed in para 5 of the petition to this Court for opinion. The question which has been framed and which is sought to be referred is as under :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the case of the assessee company who is maintaining its books of accounts on mercantile system, the sum of Rs. 26,08,065 which was written back and credited to the profit & loss account, could not be taxed in its hands under s. 41 of the IT Act, 1961 ?'2. The dispute relates to the year of assessment 1981-82. Return showing loss of Rs. 61,58,505 was filed by Jaipur Oil Products (P) Ltd., the assessee, non-petitioner herein. In response to a notice under s. 142 and 143 of the Act, account books were submitted which were examined. In its accounts books, the as...
Bhim Sen Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN203
B.R. Arora, J.1. This petition Under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the proceedings pending against him and his other fourteen partners in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh.2. M/s Bhim Sen and party was granted liquor contract for the retail sale of liquor for Group-shops at Suratgarh, Raisinghnagar and Padampur for the period from April 1, 1987 to March, 31, 1989. The petitioner is one of the partners of M/s Bhim Sen and Party. According to the prosecution, the main shop of M/s Bhim Sen and party situated at Anoopgarh, was searched on August 9, 1988, by the Excise Inspector, Suratgarh, and at the time of search, 155 bottles of simple liqour and eight bottles of rose- liquor were found. This stock was less than the required stock and according to the Excise Inspector, the petitioner, thus, contravened the condition for the liquor licence as he was required to keep in stock at least 15 days' stock. Though the inspection was ma...
Hazari Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN221
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated May 29, 1990, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused-appellant Hazari under Sections 397 and 307, I.P.C. but convicted him under Sections 326, 325, 324, 323 and 342, I.P.C.2. The incident, which led to the prosecution of the applleant Hazari took-place in the intervening night between January 8/9, 1989. The report of the incident was lodged by Pratap Singh at the Police Station, Akola (district Chittorgarh) that he and Hazari used to reside together in the house of Kanhaiya Lal Mahajan. Yesterday, he received Rs. 3637/-, out of which he made payment of Rs. 1230/-and the remaining amount was lying with him. Out of the remaining amount, Hazari took-away Rs. 2000/- from his pocket and, also, inflicted injury with an axe and Dhariya on his person. On the basis of this information, the case under Sections 323, 324, 342 and 379, I.P.C. was re...
Amar Chand Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)27
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated June 29, 1990, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh (Camp Sangariya), by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused appellant Amar Chand under Section 8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.2. The incident, which led to the prosecution of the present appellant, took-place on February 16,1988 when Assistant Sub-Inspector Karnail Singh alongwith the Station House Officer Sant Ram, Constable Mohendra Lal and Constable Paul Singh went on patrolling duty from the Police Station, Sangariya, at about 3.30 p.m. in a jeep. When they reached near the Railway Station, Dhaba, at about 4.00 p.m. one informant met them there and informed that in Mani Ram's Dhani near Canal bank of Bhagatpura minor, the accused is selling poppy-heads. Upon receiving this information, Karnail Singh, A.S.I., along with the other police personnel, proceeded towards the canal ...
Sukha and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)142
Y.R. Meena, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara dated 23.9.1981, whereby, the learned Judge has convicted the accused-petitioners for the offence under Section 4/9 of the Opium Act and sentenced each of them to six months' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's R.I.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 7.8.1974, the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Narcotics Department, Bhilwara received a written report (Ex. P/4) that on information by the informant, A.S.I. Narcotics Department along with party reached at the house of Sukha S/o Laloo Jat at village Maheshpura in morning. At that time, the accused Sukha was not found in his house. His wife was present there. In the presence of the Motbirs, the search of the house of Sukha was conducted. During search, at the corner of right-side's pole, they digged the land about one feet deep. After digging the land, they found...
Las Chand Vs. Assistant Engineer, P.H.E.D. (Watar Warks) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)21
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as Baildar on 28.9.1984 on daily wage of Rs. 14/-. According to him, he worked for 283 days in 1984, 290 days in 1985, 289 days in 1986, 292 days in 1987, 253 days in 1988 and 34 days up to February, 1989. Thus he completed more than 240 days service during last 12 months. How ever, by an oral order of termination issued by the Assistant Engineer, Public Health & Engineering Department, Jhalawar, his service was dispensed with. According to the petitioner, after oral termination of his service on 9.2.1989, 5 persons, namely, Sarvashri Prem Chand, Govind, Vinod Kumar, Chhitar and Kishan all residents of Jhalawar were appointed. The petitioner has challenged the termination of his service on ground of breach of Section 25F, 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioner has also prayed that he is entitled to regularisation of his service under Rule 3(3) of the Rajasthan Public Works Department (B & R) including Gardens, Ir...
Muneer Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)WLN231
B.R Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated September 1, 1988, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, convicting and sentencing the appellant under Sections 363, 366 and 376, I.P.C.2. The appellant Muneer was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, for offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376, I.P.C. The case of the prosecution, in nut shell, is that on March 17, 1976, accused Muneer abducted Kumari Sarla, aged about 13 years, with intent to marry her without her will from the house of Smt. Sheela-sister of PW 1 Kumri Sarla. From Jodhpur, Kumari Sarla was taken to Jaipur and from Jaipur, she was taken to Lucknow. At Lucknow, they stayed at the residence of the sister of Muneer accused and where Muneer committed rape with her against her wish for ten to eleven days and on each night, Muneer did sexual intercourse with Kumari Sarla three times. The report of the abduction was lodged by PW 3 Laxman-father of Kumari Sarla-on Ma...
Peer Mohd. and anr. Vs. Smt. Zetun
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-07-1991
Reported in: 1991WLN(UC)35
Milap Chandra, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Addl. Civil Judge No. 1 Jodhpur dated November 14, 1990 by which he did not permit the defendant petitioners to produce their evidence in rebuttal. The facts of the case giving rise to this revision petition may be summarised thus.2. The plaintiff-non-petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment on the grounds of defaults in payment of rent and bona fide necessity. The defendant-petitioners committed deaults in payment of rent and as such their defence was struck out by order dated April 15, 1989. The plaintiff produced her evidence and the defendants duly cross-examined her witnesses. The defendants have not been permitted to produce their evidence on the ground that their defence had stood struck out by the order dated April 15,1989.3. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the defendant-petitioner that issue No. 4 has been framed to the effect that whether a pa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »