Rajasthan Court August 1992 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.
Surendra Vyas Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)155
M.B. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner Shri Surendra Vyas is a practicing layer as well as Member of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly elected from Malpura-District Tonk constituency and also resides in Jaipur city. He has filed present writ petition allegodly in public interest on the ground that one Sant Bahadur S/o Ram Bhadur was domestic servant with Shri Mal Mohan Agarwal, respondent No. 2 who has his house at D-179, Kapoor Bhawan, Kanti Chandra Road, Jaipur and said Agrawal has caused his death. The said Shri Agrawal made efforts all through to see that he is not apprehended for the death of Sant Bahadur and the investigation is not fair and proper. There is interference by the politicians at highest level including Shil Kali Charan Sarraf, M.L.A. from Johari Bazar Constituency as well as by Lalit Kishore Chaturvedi Health Minister.2. Before I proceed to deal with the merits of the writ petition, it will be proper to deal with the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the responde...
Ramkumar Vs. the Secretary, R.T.A., Bikaner and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Raj30; 1992(2)WLN377
ORDERJasraj Chopra, J. 1. The case of the petitioner is that he is the holder of a non-temporary stage carriage permit on Suratgarh to Chatargarh route via Mile 80. It is a 'A' Class route, 120 kilometers in length and exists in Bikaner Region. His permit on Bus No. 9366 is valid up to 6-9-1992. Suratgarh to Mile 80 is a route 69 kilometers in length and is a part and parcel of the route Suratgarh to Chatargarn via 80 Mile and completely overlaps it to the extent of 69 Kilometers, out of the total length of 120 kms. The Regional Transport Authority has sanctioned 6 daily return services on the full length of the route and one shuttle service between Suratgarh to Mile 80.2. It is alleged that respondents Nos. 3 and 4 have applied for grant of stage carriage permit on a portion of this route i.e 'Surat-garh to Mile 80 and proposed a particular time-table in their applications, which read as under:SuratgarhMile-80Mile 80SuratgarhManoj Kumar5.00 p.m.7.00 p.m.8.30 a.m.10.30 a.m.Mayadevi4.00...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Gopi Chand Rawat and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: [1994]206ITR415(Raj)
N.C. Sharma, J.1. This order will decide three reference applications bearing Nos. 2 of 1989, 43 of 1989 and 44 of 1989 filed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Jaipur, under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer certain questions of law arising out of the order of the said Tribunal.2. The Reference Application No. 2 of 1989 relates to the assessee, Shri Gopi Chand Kawat, who as specified, Hindu undivided family, is a partner of Messrs. Maliram Pooranmal, a partnership firm dealing in the business of precious and semi-precious stones, ornaments and jewellery. This assessee filed a second revised return on August 27, 1982, for the assessment year 1980-81 declaring his total wealth as Rs. 3,57,500. The Wealth-tax Officer, Jaipur (CC-I), Jaipur, passed the assessment order on March 26, 1985. In the revised return filed by the firm, Messrs. Maliram Pooranmal showed the value of the closing stock in Jawaharat Account and the Gold...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jaipur Pharmaceutical Works
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: [1993]203ITR299(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. These three references have been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the assessment years 1976-77, 1978-79, 1979-80 and the following questions of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal have been referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :Assessment year 1976-77 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 33,825 in the case of the firm which has been allocated amongst the partners should be carried forward and set off against the profits of the firm ?' Assessment year 1978-79 : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that set off of depreciation that remained unabsorbed in the assessment of the firm relating to the assessment years 1971-72 to 1975-76 could be allowed against the firm's profit of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1978-79 ?' Assessment year 1979-80 : 'W...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Gopi Chand Rawat and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: (1992)107CTR(Raj)249; 1993(3)WLC454
ORDERN. C. SHARMA, J. :This order will decide three reference applications bearing Nos. 2/89, 43/89 and 44/89 filed by the CWT of Jaipur, under s. 27(3) of the WT Act, 1957, for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer certain questions of law arising out of the order of the said Tribunal.2. The reference application No. 2/89 relates to the assessee Shri Gopi Chand Rawat, who as specified HUF is a partner of M/s. Maliram Pooranmal, a partnership firm dealing in the business of precious and semi-precious stones, ornaments and jewellery. This assessee filed a second revised return on 27th August, 1982 for the asst. yr. 1980-81 declaring his total wealth as Rs. 3,57,500. The WTO, Jaipur (CC-1), Jaipur passed the assessment order on 26th March, 1985. In the revised return filed by firm M/s. Maliram Pooranmal it showed the value of the closing stock in Jawaharat Account and the gold ornaments & articles account of Rs. 34,85,256 and Rs. 8,71,770 respectively. While computing his ...
Smt. Amar Kanwar Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)146
R.S. Verma, J.1. Mr. Ojha is directed to accept notice. He accepts notices.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The husband of the petitioner Shri Paras Mal Singhvi was an employee of the erstwhile Jodhpur state and retired on superannuation on 1st May, 1949. Paras Mal Singhvi was contributor to the Jodhpur Contributory Provident Fund. Shri Paras Mal expired on 22.6.92. By an order dated 1.11.89, the Government of Rajasthan has sanctioned ex-gratia payment of Rs. 150/- per month with effect from 1.11.89 to the alive widows of the Jodhpur Contributory Provident Fund retirees who are not entitled to family pension vide memorandum dated 2.7.91. The petitioner applied to the respondents for grant of this ex-gratia pension. On 23.9.91, respondents have not acceded to her request and have slept over the matter. The petitioner prays that respondents be directed to pay to the petitioner ex-gratia payment of Rs. 150/- per month with effect from 1.11.89 with interest 18% per annum at th...
Bhopal Singh Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)298
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order date May 11, 1992 of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hindaun, taking cognizance for the offence under Sections 447 & 427 IPC and Section 3(i)(v)(x) of the S.E. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Magistrate has taken cognizance though the police had submitted final report. It cannot be disputed that the Magistrate can dis-agree with the police report and may take cognizance of the offend offences it is satisfied that they are grounds to proceed in the case. Whether from the evidence, a prima facie case is made out or not, is a question which shall be decided by the trial court at the stage of framing charge/ charges after hearing the petitioner. At that stage, the petitioner shall be in a better position to make his submission.2. It cannot be said that the order posed by the Magistrate is prejudicial. Hence this petition is dismissed summarily.3. However, the petitioner may surrender...
Asgar Khan Vs. Municipal Council
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)299
Jasraj Chopra, J.1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner Asgar Khan has prayed for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent Municipal Council, Udaipur to regularise his possession over the land in dispute and not to interfere with his possession over it.2. The case of the petitioner is that he being unemployed and without any work, his financial position became critical and, therefore, he has put up a temporary cabin on the Panchsheel Marg, Surajpole Road, Udaipur so that he may earn his livelihood. This Cabin was installed somewhere in the month of June 1988. Thereafter, he moved an application (Annexure-1) alongwith a map (Annexure-2) for the aforesaid land being given to him on rent on 12.10.1988 and on that application, he was allowed to use this land temporarily for a period of three months from 13.9.1989 to 12.12.1989 by the Commissioner, Municipal Council, Udaipur. A sum of Rs. 90/- were deposited by h...
Vishambhar Lal and Co. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC488; 1992WLN(UC)543
R. Balia, J.1. Petitioner had purchased 30G drums of Butter oil from the Bombay Port Trust at total price of Rs. 8,82,481.09. Out of aforesaid 300 drums 50 drums containing 10,000 Kg. of butter oil were seized by District Supply Officer, Jodhpur on 30.8.1982 from the possession of transporter, on the ground that it was imported edible oil, which has been found to be imported in contravention of provisions of Essential Commodities Act. On 6th September, 1983 the Collector, Jodhpur ordered confiscation of 50 drums of butter oil under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act. The petitioner preferred an appeal before Appellate Committee under Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act. The Appellate Committee decided the appeal on 19.7.1984. The order of confiscation passed by Collector was set aside by the Appellate Committee and it was directed that the sale price of the butter oil should be refunded to the petitioner. In spite of order dated 19.7.84 the respondents have failed to r...
Vishwambhar Lal and Co. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)554
R. Balia, J.1. Petitioner had purchased 300 drums of Butter-oil from the Bombay Port Trusts at total price of Rs. 8,82,481.09. Out of aforesaid 300 drums 50 drums containing 10,000 Kg of butter oil were seized by District Supply Officer, Jodhpur on 30.8.1982 from the possession of transporter, on the ground that it was imported edible oil, which has been found to be imported in contravention of provisions of Essential Commodities Act. On 6th September, 1983 the Collector, Jodhpur ordered confiscation of 50 drums of butter-oil under section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act. The petitioner preferred an appeal before Appellate Committes under Sanction of 6C of the Essential Commodities Act. The Appellate Committee decided the appeal on 19.7.1984. The order of confiscation passed by Collector was set aside by the Appellate Committee and it was directed that the sale price of the butter oil should be refunded to the petitioner. In spite of order dated 19.7.84 the respondents have failed ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »