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.
inder Raj and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-23-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)WLN615
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor case diary perused. The investigation is complete. Charge-sheet has been filed and further arrest of the petitioners is no more required purposes.2. It is contended by the learned Counsel that initially a report was made by Budhram on March 14, 95 at P.S. Neemkathana and on the said report proceedings Under Section 174, Cr.PC were initiated as the report was incomplete about the commission of any cognizable offence. It was also contended hat at the time of inquest report also it was not disclosed by any person that any rape was committed on the victim Smt. Shakuntala and she committed suicide under a fear of being defamed in the society. The learned Counsel contended that after 5 days of the incident a report was made by Sundaram on March 19, 1995 narrating the story about the commission of rape and murder of Smt. Shakuntala in which the grand-mother of the deceased and her sister were made ...
Dhulji Vs. R.T.A., Udaipur and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Raj87
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 has been filed by Dhulji to restrain the R.T.A., Udaipur from considering any application and granting and issuing any permit on Banswara to Pratappur via Thikaria route.2. The writ petition has been filed on 14-12-1992. While admitting the writ petition, this Court on 12-1-1993 restrained the R.T.A., Udaipur from granting any permit either temporary or non-temporary on the route in question. One Smt. Laxmi Devi filed an application for impleading her as a party-respondent to this writ petition on the ground that non-temporary stage carriage permit was not granted to her due to stay order, which was allowed by the order of this Court dated 24-1-1994. The ad interim order was confirmed on 20-1-1995. The non-petitioners filed reply on 7-3-1995. The matter has come up before me and as agreed by the learned Counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard finally.3. Mr. Munshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner has mainly conten...
Anand Kumar and Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Raj281; 1995(3)WLC183; 1995(1)WLN477
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1. Since both the writ petitions raise common question of fact and law, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. In both the writ petitions, petitioners seek directions to give admission in IInd Year Professional Course of M.B.B.S. at J.L.N. Medical College, Ajmer arid S.P. Medical College, Bikaner respectively, and no N.O.C. is required from M.C.I. for such transfer. 3. On the statement of counsel for the petitioner that petitioner passed 1st Year M.D. 'Physician' from Kalinin Medical Institute, U.S.S.R. whose changed name is Tver State Medical Institute, is a recognised institute by Medical Council of India, Delhi and in identical matter S.B. Civil Writ Petition No; 5099/93 notice has been issued and stay has been granted, this court in the writ petition No. 772/94 also issued show cause notice on 17-2-1994. 4. In reply to show cause notice, respondents Nos. 1 to 3 filed their reply with Annex. R. 1 and R. 2 stating that question of international migrati...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Manglam Cement Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR369(Raj); 1995(3)WLC158; 1995(2)WLN8
V.K. Singhal, J.1. On the request of the Revenue, the following two questions of law arising out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, dated May 7, 1985, have been referred under Section 256(1) of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1979-80 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that interest received of Rs. 2,58,089 on short-term deposits with banks was not taxable under Section 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that interest received of Rs. 2,58,089 on short-term deposits with banks was to be reduced from the interest payments while capitalising the various expenditure to capital account ?' 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a limited company and was incorporated on October 27, 1976. The certificate of commencement of business was issued by the Registrar of Comp...
Satish Kumar Porwa Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: (1996)ILLJ621Raj; 1995(3)WLC93; 1995(1)WLN584
Arun Madan, J.1. The petitioner who was appointed as L.D.C. on temporary basis in the office of Director, Gram Vikas and Panchayatraj Department in panchayat samiti, Atru on daily wages, had last served in the capacity of junior accountant in the said panchayat samiti. He has challenged the impugned order of termination, dated May 24, 1989 by way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground that the impugned retrenchment of the petitioner from service could not be done without complying the mandatory provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The short question which arises for consideration of the Court in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner who is a temporary appointee of the panchayat samiti and appointed for working in a particular project, can claim benefit of regularisation in service on completion of the Project on the ground that he had completed 240 days of service ...
Smt. Suraj Devi Vs. Smt. Sita Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Raj6; 1995(2)WLC640; 1995(1)WLN480
V.G. Palshikar, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17th May, 1994 passed by Hon'ble single Judge of this Court in S. B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2 of 1994, confirming the judgment dated 4-12-93 passed by the District Judge, Jodhpur, granting Probate of a Will under the Indian Succession Act, 1925.2. The facts giving rise to the appeal, stated in brief, are that one Shri Sohan Lal expired on 9-10-89, leaving a Will in respect of his properties. He was employed as a Mistry in the Rajasthan State Electricity Board and had retired from service months before his death. Proceedings were, therefore, initiated under the Indian Succession Act to obtain Probate of this Will. Grant of Probate was opposed by the present appellant Smt. Suraj Devi, widow of Sohan Lal Mali on the allegation that the Will is a forged document. It has been created to deprive her of her succession rights, she being legally married wife of Sohanlal.3. In the proceedings, it was submitted by the respon...
Purshottam Das Vs. S.T.A.T. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Raj69
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the order dt. 1-.2-1993 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur and also the order dt. 1-7-1992 passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur. The petitioner has also prayed that the Time-table dt. 15-7-1992 issued by the Secretary to the R.T.A., Jodhpur may kindly be set aside.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.3. The main contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the decision rendered in Ram Niwas v. S. T. A. T., (1993) 2 WLC 262, at one time or in piecemeal, a route can be extended not more than 24 kms. in length and not beyond that whereas in this case the extension has been allowed to the respondents Nos. 3 to 5 for more than 24 kms., which deserves to be set aside. He has also submitted that the impugned time-table has been issued to put the petitioner and the other grantee of the permit to irreparable lo...
Hans Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Raj230
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issuedrestraining the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 and 7 from interfering over petitioner's land shown in the Naksha trace (Anx. 5) and not to make allotment to any other person and also prays that not to dispossess the petitioner without due process of law. 2. It is alleged that out of Araji Number 777 total measuring 364 bighas and 8 biswas in Roon Rajsamand Patwar Circle Sanwad Tehsil and District Rajsamand, the petitioner has purchased the disputed land measuring 23.10 bigha from one Kishan Singh and Pan Singh respondents Nos. 5 and 6 respectively in the year 1972 and paying land revenue and has also consumed water of the lake. It is alleged that the proceedings were initiated Under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act and he was declared trespasser on 25-5-1987 by the Tehsildar. On appeal, the Collector vide judgment dt. 21-12-1990 set aside the order and remanded the matter back with a directio...
Kushal Chand Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR320(Raj)
ORDER--Assessment of partner framed without applying r. 2 of WT Rules, 1957.Ratio :Assessment of partner of firm framed by IAC without applying his mind to provisions of r. 2 of WT Rules and taking the share of partner on the basis of book value shown in capital account was prejudicial to interest of revenue, order so passed can be revised by CWT.Held :The word `erroneous' is comprehensive enough to include such an order which is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. An error which may be of fact or law, as is evident from the record, could confer the jurisdiction on the Commissioner Wealth Tax under section 25(2). In the present case, the dispute is with regard to non-application of the provisions of rule 2(1) of the Wealth Tax Rules while determining the value of the partner's share in the firm. The error of law, therefore, will make an order passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax as erroneous for which the jurisdiction under section 25(2) could be exercised....
Divisional Forest Officer Vs. Shri Ram Prasad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ71Raj; 1995(3)WLC716
R.S. Kejriwal, J. 1. These miscellaneous appeals under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short the 'Act') have been directed against the orders dated December 30, 1992, passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kota, awarding compensation to the claimant-Respondent No. 1.2. As common questions of law are involved in these appeals, they are decided by one common judgement,3. The first submission of the counsel for the appellant is that the deceased Smt. Geeta and Smt. Chhania were in the employment of Shri Durga Shanker and not in the employment of the appellant and as such the claim cannot be decreed against the appellant.4. On the other hand, counsel for the claimant respondents submits that even for the sake of arguments, it be taken that the deceased Smt. Geeta and Smt. Chhania were employed by Durga Shanker Contractor, they worked for the appellant and as such by virtue of Section 12(1) of the Act, the appellant is also liable for the payment o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »