Rajasthan Court September 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.
Mahesh Bhardwaj Vs. Smt. Smita Bhardwaj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Raj47
Milap Chandra Jain, J.1. This appeal has been filed under Section 19 Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter to be called 'the Act') against the order of the Judge, Family Court, Jodhpur dated July 14, 1993 along with an application under Section 5, Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 16 days in filing the appeal.2. It has been averred in the said application that the appellant came to know about the said orderdated July 14, 1993 as late as on August 25, 1993. It is clearly recited in the order sheet dated July 14, 1993 that on that day an application for exemption from personal attendance was moved on behalf of the appellant Mahesh Bhardwaj by his brother Ajit Kumar Bhardwaj. A certifiedcopy of this application dated July 14, 1993 has also been filed. It is Stated in it that the appellant Mahesh Bhardwaj is in the Rajas-than Administrative Service, leave has not been sanctioned to him and as such he was unable to appear before the Court. This shows that the appellant Mahesh Bhardw...
Bhanwarlal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ625
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J.1. The instant revision is preferred against the judgment dated 29-1-85 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jalore in Cr. Appeal No. 85/84 upholding the conviction and sentence awarded by learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalore dated 17-10-84 in Cr. Original Case No. 460/83 except with the modification that in place of running both the sentences passed under Sections 411 and 414 IPC conjectively both the sentences were to run concurrently. The accused Bhanwarlal has been convicted and sentenced under Section 411 IPC for one year R.I. together with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to further undergo three months' R.I. The petitioner has also been convicted and sentenced under Section 414 IPC for a period of one year R.I. as stated above. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution briefly stated are that in consequence of a written report of Shri Sakal Chand PW-34 at the Police Station Ahore on 11-2-82 at 5 p....
Jasu Alias Jaswant Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1160
R.R. Yadav, J.1. This reference for confirmation of death sentence is made by learned Addl. Distt. and Sessions Judge, No. 2, Sriganganagar to this Court vide his Judgment dt. 18-8-1992 arising out of sessions case No. 19/ 1991 by which he found Jasu alias Jaswant Singh guilty for committing brutal and cruel murder of Jaspal Singh under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to death by hanging by the neck till death and a fine of Rs. 100/-.2. The learned trial Judge further found the accused Jasu alias Jaswant Singh guilty for attempt to commit murder of Major Singh under Section 307, I.P.C. and sentenced him to 7 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to further under go one year's simple imprisonment. The learned trial Judge also found the above named accused guilty for the offence under Section 397, I.P.C. and sentenced him to 7 years R. I. together with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to further under go one year's simple imprisonment. The learned trial court further f...
Kshetriya Khadi Gramodyog Samiti Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ1072Raj; 1995(1)WLC450
Arun Madan, J.1. This writ petition was filed in this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in the matter of Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act') against the order of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Jaipur dated June 4,1984 (impugned) in the present petition. The petitioner has also challenged the vires of Section 7A of the Act and has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for deletion of the said provision from the Statute and has further prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated June 4, 1984 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner.2. The facts giving rise to this writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner-establishment is a registered society, registered under the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 on April 25, 1978 and started manufacturing Khadi with effect from April, 1979. Soon after its registration, the petitioner- establis...
Bar Association, Sri Ganganagar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Raj11; 1995(1)WLC9
Milap Chandra Jain, J. 1. Courts exist for the litigants and not for Judges and Lawyers and litigants' interest is Supreme.2. This writ petition has been filed for declaring Section 20A of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be called the Act) as ultra vires of the Constitution and for quashing the order No. F. 12(26)Raj/Gr. 1/77-11 dated June 27, 1994 (Annexure 4) of the Revenue Department (Group 1), Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur issued under Section 20A of the Act notifying that the Revenue appellate Authority, Sri Ganga-nagar will have his place of sitting at Raishinghnagar also for a week.3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the State Government is misusing its power from time to time just to suit its convenience and to achieve something by pressing into service the provisions of Section 20A of the Act. He further contended that similar notification dated April 4, 1980 by which the jurisdiction of the Revenue Appellate Authoriti...
Maniya @ Mansingh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)WLC450; 1994(2)WLN523
R.R. Yadav, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi dated 5.8.1993 passed in Sessions Case No. 20 of 1991, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellant Mainya @ Manisingh of the offence Under Section 302 IPC and has sentenced him to imprisonment for life together with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default, to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment.2. According to the prosecution story, it is alleged that on 1.11.1989, the first information Wall Moh. (P.W.9) was standing in front of Neel Kamal Hotel and was talking with P.W.6 Ayub. Many other people were also standing there. In the meantime, they saw deceased Bakshu Khan alongwith his youngest son Karim Khan coming on the road with fodder of goat towards bus stand. When both of them reached near the place ear-marked for celebration of Holi Festival near the electric pole, where there are Babool trees, the appellant came running from behind the babool trees a...
Krishna Kumar Rawat and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)WLC296
V.K. Singhal, J. 1. The petitioners have entered into an agreement to purchase a plot of 9,500 sq. yards (7,945 sq. metre) with two godowns having an area of 2,920 sq. metres with respondent No. 3 for a consideration of Rs. 99,84,500 out of which a sum of Rs. 40,00,000 was paid by cheque and the possession of the two godowns, guard-room, office premises along with 1/4th undivided share of the remaining open land was delivered. Form No. 37-1 along with a copy of the agreement was submitted under Section 269UC on December 31, 1993. The Valuation Officer of the appropriate authority of the Income-tax Department, vide his letter dated January 18, 1994, informed the petitioner and the seller for inspection of the property on January 21, 1994. The appropriate authority, after receiving the report from the Valuation Officer, issued a show-cause notice on March 8, 1994, under Section 269UD(1A) of the Act on the ground that the apparent consideration was lower for various reasons mentioned ther...
Bhakhar Ram and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1345; I(1995)DMC350; 1994(2)WLN653
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. Appellants Bhakhar Ram and Smt. Gera alongwith co-accused Deena Ram were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer, who by his judgment dated 5.8.92 found the appellants guilty for the offences Under Sections 304B and 304 part Second IPC and sentenced each one of them to ten years' R.I. with a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default to further undergo R.I. for two and a half months on each count and further ordered that their sentences shall run concurrently. However, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted co-accused Deena Ram.2. A brief resume of facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal may be recapitulated. On 8.3.89 at about 11 p.m. Smt. Geeta aged about 25 years was brought by her husband Bhakhar Ram, appellant, to the S. J. Government Hospital, Jaisalmer. She had about 55 to 60% burn injuries on her body. She was admitted in the hospital by DW 1 Dr. Ramji Ram. It appears that on the same day, the S.H.O., P.S. Jaisalmer also sent a letter Ex. P. 19 to the M...
Krishna Kumar Rawat and Others Vs. Union of India and Others.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: (1995)123CTR(Raj)61; [1995]214ITR610(Raj); [1995]78TAXMAN142(Raj)
V. K. SINGHAL J. - The petitioners have entered into an agreement to purchase a plot of 9,500 sq. yards (7,945 sq. metre) with two godowns having an area of 2,920 sq. metres with respondent No. 3 for a consideration of Rs. 99,84,500 out of which a sum of Rs. 40,00,000 was paid by cheque and the possession of the two godowns, guard-room, office premises along with 1/4th Undivided share of the remaining open land was delivered. From No. 37-I along with a copy of the agreement was submitted under section 269UC on December 31, 1993. The Valuation Officer of the appropriate authority of the Income-tax Department, vide his letter dated January 18, 1994, informed the petitioner and the seller for inspection of the property on January 21, 1994. The appropriate authority, after receiving the report from the Valuation Officer, issued a show-cause notice on March 8, 1994, under section 269UD(1A) of the Act on the ground that the apparent consideration was lower for various reasons mentioned there...
Rathi Gases Ltd. Vs. Rajasthan State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-13-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Raj139
ORDERArun Madan, J. 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India in the matter of Electricity Supply Act, 1948 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act 1) concerning the additional tariff and the concessions, the benefit of exemption of which, the petitioner can be held entitled under the Rules or not, by virtue of the petitioner being an expanding industrial unit. According to the petitioner its Company was granted an industrial licence No. IL:293(74), dated 28th June, 1974 for establishment of a unit at Ghaziabad in U.P. for manufacturer of oxygen gas and later on the necessary sanction was accorded by the Government of India on 30th November, 1974 to shift the site of the petitioner-company from Ghaziabad to Alwar, Rajasthan and at the time of establishment of the said industrial unit, the petitioner-company had applied for power connection of 380 K.V.A. connected load against the contract demand of 400 K.V.A. from the Rajasthan State Elect...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »