Rajasthan Court March 1995 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.
Kheraj Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3113
B.R. Arora, J.1. The aforesaid Murder Reference has been made by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer, under Section 366 Cr. P. C. for confirmation of the Sentence of Death passed by him. Accused Kheraj Ram, also, filed D. B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 481 of 1994, challenging the judgment dated 7-9-94, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted him for the offence under Section 302 IPC and passed the Sentence of Death. As the Murder Reference as well as the D. B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal arise out of the same proceedings, they are, therefore, being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Accused Kheraj Ram was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer for committing the murder of his wife Smt. Amru, the two daughters Kumari Meera (aged about 12 years) and Kumari Kesi (aged about 9 years) and his brother-in-law Achla in the night intervening between 9th and 10th October, 1992, in village Baytu. The case o...
Ram NaraIn Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2847
B.R. Arora, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 5-3-94, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Shri Ganganagar, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted appellant Sukhdeo Singh for the offence under Section 302 IPC and appellant Ram Narain Singh for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine further to undergo four month's simple imprisonment.2. Accused-appellants Ram Narain Singh and Sukhdeo Singh were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Shri Ganganagar, for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 302 IPC, respectively, for committing the murder of Niranjan Singh nearing the Sale Out-let of country-made liquour in Chak No. 1 -X on 1-9-90 at 8.00 p.m. The case of the prosecution is that deceased Niranjan Singh agreed to sell twenty-two Bighas of his land to his brother accused Ram Narain Singh and took an adva...
C.i.T. Jodhpur Vs. Achaldas Dhanraj and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)WLN208
V.K. Singhal, J.1. Both the matters are disposed of by this single order since the question of law involved is common.2. In D.B. I.T. Reference No. 9/92 the following question of law has been referred by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of assessment year 1987-88 under Section. 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:Whether on the facts and In the circumstances of the case the ITAT was legally justified in granting the benefits of amendment to Section 43B which was applicable w.e.f. asstt. year 1988-89 to the assessee in an appeal for an earlier year; thereby deleting the addition of Rs. 30,112/-made under Section. 43B.3. In D.B.I.T. Ref. No. 26/92 the following two questions have been referred:(1) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in directing that the amount of Rs. 92,122/-being the unpaid sales-tax on 4.11.1983 i.e. the last date of the previous year should not be disallowed under Section 43B if it Is found to have been paid (su...
Hari Mohan Sharma Vs. the Regional Research Institute (Ayurvedic) and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)WLC358; 1995(2)WLN537
Arun Madan, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the decision of the Enquiry Officer imposing the penalty of censure on the petitioner as well as the decision of the appellate authority imposing the penalty of with-holding of 3 grade increments with cumulative effect against the petitioner.2. The facts giving rise to the filling of this writ petition briefly stated, are that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Compounder in the Regional Research Institute (for short 'RRI') (Ayurvedic), Jaipur with effect from 15-3-75. The Assistant Director, RRI had served a memorandum containing imputation of charges of misconduct and misbehvaiour against the petitioner dated 20-1-88 vide Annex-1.The petitioner was directed to submit his reply within 10 days from the receipt of the memorandum and was also provided opportunity of hearing by giving him opportunity of filing written statement. The petitioner filed his reply...
Rajeev Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)WLC216; 1995(2)WLN534
Arun Madan, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The question of law which has been raised in this writ petition is as to whether the Cattle Feed Plant which is a unit, of Rajasthan Co-operative Dairy Federation Ltd. and which is being run by the State Government for the purpose of meeting out need of cattle feed falls within the definition of 'industry' as defined under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act')? The case of the petitioner in short is that he was appointed on 5.5.88 by the respondent No. 2 on the post of Chemist and the petitioner joined his services with effect from 6.5.88 at Nadbai with respondent No. 3 It has been contended in the writ petition that the petitioner worked on the said post continuously from 6.5.88 to 2.1.89 without any break and thus worked for more than 240 days. The salary of the petitioner for December, 1988 and 2 days of January, 1989 was still outstanding as on date of the filling of th...
Mukhtiyar Singh Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)WLN678
R.R. Yadav, J.1. The petitioner-appellants challenged the vires of Section 13 and 13 A of the Rajasthan Colonisation Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'),' before the learned Single Judge by filing seperate writ petitions on the ground that they are violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(F) and 21 of the Constitution of India.2. The learned Single Judge vide his common judgment dated 24.2.1986, dismissed the writ petitions and held that the aforesaid Sections are valid. Being aggrieved with the said order the petitioner-appellants have filed these Special Appeals under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance. As common questions of law are Involved in these appeals, they are decided by one judgment.3. We have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment of the learned Single Judge and also the record of the case. In our opinion Section 13 (1) of the Act, does not create any absolute bar for the transfer of rights or interest in the. lands but It provides th...
Tejbhan and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1996WLC(Raj)UC640; 1995(1)WLN295
B.R. Arora, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 2.6,87, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellants for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each and in default of payment of fine further to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 201/34 I.P.C. Both the sentences were ordered to non concurrently.2. The appellants were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 201 I.P.C. The case of the prosecution is that deceased Smt. Shakuntla the sister of Babu Ram was married...
Lal Chand and 47 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-27-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)WLC331; 1995(1)WLN649
R.R. Yadav, J.1. The Instant writ petition and other writ petitions have been filed seeking reliefs to quash the demand for the price of the lands allotted to them at four times rate of 'reserve price' as contemplated in the notification dated 4.6.81 (Annex. 1) and further prayed to restrain the respondents from charging the said price from them under the proviso to the said notification Anx. 1 to the writ petitions. Since in all these writ petitions, common questions of law and facts are involved, hence these petitions are being decided on merits by a common judgment treating S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 830 of 1994 as a leading case in which reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents.2. Brief facts necessary for deciding these writ petitions are to be noticed that Bada Hardwari Nath Dharmarth Trust and Bada Mawasi Nath Dharmarth Ttust were land-owners of agricultural lands situated in Gang Canal Area of Tehsil Sri Ganganagar. The lands in dispute have been...
Dr. Ravi Dutt Sharma Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-24-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)WLC560; 1995(2)WLN1
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged the order dated 5/8/1985, passed by the State of Rajasthan through the Special Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Jaipur by which a penalty of stoppage of two grade increments with cumulative effect has been imposed on the petitioners and, in addition to this penalty, denial of salary for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance already paid, has also been imposed on the petitioner by the said order.2. The circumstances which led to the passing the aforesaid order are enumerated here in as follows: While the petitioner was holding the post of Incharge, Government Hospital, Badnagar, he conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of one Smt. Kiran Devi and gave a report that the cause of death of Smt. Kiran Devi was suffocation due to smoke. During the investigation of death of Smt. Kiran Devi, the Superintendent of Police, Jaipur consid...
Arihant Cement Agency Vs. District Supply Officer, Chittorgarh and anr ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-23-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Raj196; 1995(2)WLC748
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J. 1. A learned single Judge of this Court vide order dated 8-8-1991 directed this petition to be listed for final disposal at order stage on 10-9-1991. This is how this case is posted before me for final disposal at order stage,2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the demand of Rs. 15,827.73 raised by the notice Anx. 13 to the writ petition on the ground inter alia that the orders dated 28-7-1983 and 9-9-1983 are illegal.3. According to the petitioner, aforesaid orders fixing the various prices are also beyond the statutory powers of the State Government. According to the petitioner the State Government is entitled only to fix the sale price and no other, amount can be statutorily fixed under the inherent power under Clause 10 of the Cement Control Order or any other power which may be exercised by the State Government in that behalf.4. According to the averments made in writ petition, Sub-clause (2) of Clause 10 of the Cement Control ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »