Rajasthan Court April 1994 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.
Sukh Lal Vs. Legal Representatives of Narayan Das and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Raj5
Milap Chandra Jain, J.1. This second appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Nagaur dated September 25, 1993 by which she has dismissed the appeal of the defendant-appellant filed against the judgment of the learned Munsif, Nagaur dated December 7, 1981, decreeing the suit for recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits and ejectment of the defendant-appellant from the suit shop situated in the town of Nagaur.2. The facts of the case giving rise to this second appeal may be summarised thus. On April 23, 1973, the plaintiff Narayan Das filed a suit for recovery of arrears, of rent and ejectment against the defendant-appellant Sukhlal and his brother Sampat Lal on the grounds of default in payment of rent of three years and reasonable and bona fide necessity of the suit shop for his brother Jai Kishan, a member of his joint family. The suit was resisted by the defendants. On February 7, 1974, issues on reasonable and bona fide necessity arid...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mayur Laminators
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR646(Raj)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of its order dated March 10, 1983, in respect of the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that even if used and old machinery is purchased from the open market for the formation of an industrial undertaking it will not be a disqualification under Section 80J(4)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the purposes of deduction under Section 80J of the Act, 1961 ?'2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered firm and is a manufacturer of packing material particularly in bags of hessian cloth and D. W. tarpaulin mixed with bitumen, rayons, etc. During the course of assessment, it was found by the Income-tax Officer that the deduction which has been claimed under Section 80J(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not available to the assessee since the difference of the total c...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Judge, Industr ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: (1995)ILLJ357Raj; 1994(2)WLC340; 1994(1)WLN313; 1985LABIC480
Jain J. 1. These special appeals have been filed against the common order of the learned Single Judge dated March 10, 1993 by which the appellants' writ petitions challenging the orders of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Courts reducing the penalties awarded to the workmen-respondents by the employer-appellant have been dismissed. 2. Relevant facts are shown in tabular column under as follows No. & Year of Gist of Charge/s against respondentCist of Punishment imposed by ManagementDate of judgment of Industrial Tribunal-cum-LabourCourtPunishment' reduced by the IndustrialTribunal-cum-Labour CourtGrounds for reduction of punishmentS. No.Write PetitionSpecial Appeal123456781.643/92 (Operator)197/93Repealed absence from duty for total 136 1/2 days withoutprior information & sanction of leave.Withholding of one grade increment with cumulative effect.01,05.91Withholding of one grade increement without cumulativeExcessive2.3746/93 (Conductor)198/93Carrying 1&5 passengers without ticket on ...
Asha Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ2431; 1994(2)WLC443; 1994(1)WLN303
1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 10-10-1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar is Sessions Case No, 34/88, whereby he found the accused-appellant guilty for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ -; in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. Briefly the facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that Anda Ram Bawari had two sons from his first wife, namely Het Ram and appellant Asha Ram. Het Ram died in the year 1984. Kila No. 6714-15 of Murabba No. 166/421 and Kila Nos. 9 to 14 and 17 to 24 of Murabba No. 167/421 situated in Chak No. 16 DWD were alleged to be in the temporary allotment of Asha Ram. But since the said land was in excess to the land permanently allotted to him, the temporary allotment of the aforementioned land was cancelled in view of the provisions of Post-1955 Rules, Het Ram being the eldest son of Anna Ram filed a...
Savia and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2744
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. These appeals have been preferred by the accused appellants as well as the State of Rajasthan against the judgment dated 10-6-85 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore, whereby he found accused Savia guilty of the offences under Section 302, 307/34, 447 IPC and Section 27, Arms Act and sentenced him to life imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 200/- & in default to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment under the first count, five years' R.I. together with a fine of Rs. 100/- & in default to further undergo one month's R.I. for the second count, one month's R.I. for the third count and six months' R.I. for the last count. He found accused Teja guilty of the offences under Section.307 and 448 IPC and sentenced him to seven years R.I. with a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default to further undergo two months' R.I. for the first count and to six months R.I. together with a fine of Rs. 100/- & in default to further undergo one month's R.I. under the sec...
Anwar Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: 1994(2)WLC159; 1994(1)WLN302
Rajedra Saxena, J.1. One Anwar moved petition under Article 32 of the Constitution or India on behalf of the convict Bhai Khan in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India praying for latter's release on parole for looking after his family and for arranging the marriage of his daughters. This petition has been transmitted to this Court by the Asstt. Registrar by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The notices were given to the learned Addl. Advocate General and convict Bhai Khan was called from the Central Jail, Jodhpur.2. We have heard convict Bhai Khan and Dr. S.S. Bhandawat, Addl. Advocate General.3. The petitioner has been found guilty for the offence under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985 (in short 'the Act of 1985') by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer and was sentenced to 15 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 2 lacs and in default of payment of fine to further undergo to two years R.I. Bhaikhan filed an appeal against his conviction sentence being SB Cr. Appeal No. 8/1989, which wa...
Smt. Gerki Vs. Duda Ram
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: 1994(1)WLN581
B.R. Arora, J.1. This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated 4-2-93, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat (district Pali) by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge partly allowed the revision petition, filed by the petitioner, maintained the order granting maintenance passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Jaitaran, and allowed Rs. 300/- for medical expenses.2. Applicant Smt. Gerki W/o Duda Ram filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on 21-1-82 for the grant of maintenance to her. This application was opposed by the husband, viz. Duda Ram. The case of the applicant petitioner, as unfolded in the petition, is that she was married to Duda Ram about twenty-eight years before and lived with him upto 5-10-80, when she was turned-out from the house by the husband and her husband contacted second marriage with one Mst. Gugli and, now, they are living as husband and wife. Applicant Smt. Gerki, therefore, claimed that she may be awarded R...
Dal Chand Sharma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Raj199; 1994(2)WLC389; 1994(2)WLN15
ORDERR. Balia, J. 1. Short question raised in this petition is what is the effect of amendment in Section 30 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 which has been brought into effect w.e.f. 25-1-1994, by excluding the jurisdiction of Central Govt. to entertain revision in respect of Minor Mineral, in respect of such petitions which are already pending on the commencement of amending Ordinance.2. The petitioner was granted lease for aperiod of 10 years commencing from 4-7-1980 and ending on 3-7-1990. Before the expiry ofthe lease the petitioner applied for renewal of the lease on 19-12-1989. The renewal application was rejected by the State Govt. on 17-12-1990. The petitioner also filed representation which was also replied on 9-4-1992. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the Central Govt. under Section 30 of the Act on 27-4-1992, the Central Govt. entertained the revision petition and passed the interim order in favour of the petitioner...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Mannalal Soorana
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-05-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR427(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. This application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, has been filed for giving directions to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the following question of law, which were raised before us under Section 27(1) and the application for which was rejected by the Tribunal, vide its order dated November 16, 1984. '1. Whether, the failure of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal's to appraise the import of their decision in the quantum appeal in Wealth-tax Appeals Nos. 425 to 427/(JP) of 1979, dated August 30, 1980, and in Wealth-tax Appeal No. 7/(JP) of 1978-79, dated July 17, 1978, constitutes a mistake apparent from the record in terms of Section 35(1)(e) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has acted without jurisdiction in entertaining under Section 35(1)(e) of the Act a point which is not only prima facie debatable in terms of the Supreme Court decision in the case...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ganesh Sizing Factory
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-05-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR355(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. This application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been moved against the order dated November 14, 1983, which has been rectified on March 22, 1984, on a miscellaneous application having been moved by the assessee in respect of the assessment year 1978-79. 2. We need not go to the various points which have been raised. The question of law as stated in the application under Section 256(1) was as under : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in not holding, that there was no mistake in its order dated November 14, 1983, in Income-tax Appeal No. 592/(JP) of 1984 apparent from the record to be rectified under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified while passing order under Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in restoring the issue regarding grant of reg...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »