Rajasthan Court December 1996 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.
R.N. Products Vs. Assistant Commercial Taxes
Court: Sales Tax Tribunal STT Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: (2000)119STC400Tribunal
1. These applications have been filed under Section 8(1), Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Act, 1995. In the first application it has been prayed that the notice dated April 18, 1996 for showing cause as to why tax be not imposed at the rate of 15 per cent with interest and penalty on the sale of mineral water to the tune of Rs. 2,62,875 during the assessment year 1992-93 and of Rs. 32,430 during assessment year 1993-94 be quashed. In the second application, order dated October 29, 1996 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpur, has been challenged by which he has confirmed the levy of tax on mineral water at the rate of 15 per cent along with interests and penalty relating to the assessment year 1991-92.2. As the facts involved are similar and law applicable is same, both these cases are being decided by this common judgment.3. The facts of the case may be summarised thus : The applicant carries on the business of processing water in the brand name of Classic Mineral Water. An ...
Gulam Farid and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2226; 1997(1)WLC583; 1996(2)WLN571
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for non-petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 and perused the petition.2. According to the averments made in this petition non-petitioners No. 2 and 3 filed a suit against the petitioners for declaration regarding the quarry No. 204 and 203/1 situated in Gunawali range. The petitioners case is that those land and quarries were in possession of the petitioners. In the plaint mentioned above a prayer was made for the issue of permanent injunction to the effect that the defendant would not interfere in the quarry No. 204 and 204/1 and eastern side for which an application for allotment has been made. A copy of the plaint has been annexed with this petition. An application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 was also filed praying for ad interim injunction against the defendants. The learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) and Chief Judicial Magistrate Parbatsar after hearing both t...
Ashwani Kumar Bhardwaj Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1365
ORDERA.S. Godara, J.1. This bail petition has been filed under Section 439, Cr.P.C. by the accused-petitioner in F.I.R. No. 228/96. P.S. Chanderia, District Chittorgarh, after similar application was dismissed by the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge No. 1. Chittorgarh in Criminal Disc. Petition No. 563/96 vide its order dated 6-12-1996.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case against the present petitioner as well as his co-accused Mukesh Kumar Sharma who is, presently absconding evading his arrest right from the beginning, is that Bhanwar Singh, S.H.O. of P.S. Chanderia received an information on 10-6-1996 that Mukesh Kumar was running a Mill wherein poppy-husk was being powdered. Bhanwar Singh, accompanied by his subordinate officials as well as two motbir witnesses Nanda and Ram Singh, raided the premises situated in the village Bojunda, on the Chittorgarh-Udaipur highway road and they found that a room was being used as a Mill for preparation of the powder by milling the po...
Munshi Ram and ors. Vs. Prakash Chand and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC166; 1996(2)WLN577
R.R. Yadav, J.1. In these First Appeals, a preliminary question relating to preparation of paper-books is involved, therefore, this question is being decided by a composite order. First Appeal No. 19/90 shall be treated to be leading case.2. In First Appeal No. 19/90, the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) was directed on 21.11.96 to submit a report with consultation of Officer-on-Special Duty (Rules) as to why the First Appeal was not posted for dismissal as envisaged under Rule 184 of the Rules of the High Court of Rajasthan, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of the Court').3. In pursuance of the order dated 21.11.96, the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) has submitted his report on 27.11.96 to the effect that in SB Civil First Appeal cases, practice of preparation of paper-books has never been followed, hence, the said appeal was not listed for dismissal under Rule 184 of the Rules of the Court. In support of his report, he brought to the notice of the Court a decision rendered by the ...
Satya NaraIn Garg Vs. the Board of Secondary Education
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)WLN581
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. The question for consideration in this writ petition is, whether the period of suspension suffered by the petitioner, which has been ordered to be treated as earned leave is a justified order, or whether the same requires interference so as to quash it as illegal.2. The circumstances under which the aforesaid question requires to be decided are enumerated in its essential details as follows. The petitioner while working as Senior Assistant in the Rajasthan Secondary Education Board was also elected and functioning as President of the Rajasthan Secondary Education Board Employees Sangh, which is registered under the Indian Trade Union Act, 1926. The sangh gave a call for implementation of certain agreement concluded between the management and the staff, to which the Management resisted as a result of which there was a tiff between the management and the petitioner along with his associates consequently, the petitioner and seven others were alleged of some over-act...
Mahendra Kumar Sharma and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)WLC702; 1996(2)WLN570
V.K. Singhal, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the in-action of the respondent Jaipur Development Authority in not checking illegal construction of the temple by Vardhman Jain Sudhar Samiti. The submission of the petitioner is that when-ever a land is developed and plots are allotted, certain areas are left for development as facility area and no one has any right to encroach on the said land or make a construction thereon. The respondent No. 4 is said to be Principal of Prem Santi Public School who in conspiracy with other associates have made un-authorised constructions and the JDA inspite of attention being drawn could not take any action against the Zinalaya.2. On behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the Jai n Temple is constructed over 788.88 sq. yds and the Vardhman Jain Sudhar Samiti with the consent of all the members of the colony have constructed the said temple and there exists the temples of Ram, Laxman, Sita, Hanumanji etc. and, therefore, 130 members...
Sharad Dhakar Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)WLN563
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. This order shall dispose of two applications filed by the learned Public Prosecutor and one application dated 3.12.96 filed on behalf of accused appellant Sharad Dhakar under Section 391, Cr.P.C. for taking further evidence in these appeals.2. The learned Public Prosecutor has prayed that the daily diary entries Nos. 1745/dated 24.4.94. 1861 & 1866/dt. 31.8.94 & entries in Malkhana register dated 1.6.94, 22.7.94 and 31.8.94 of Police Station Sodala, the order of the Superintendent of Police, Jaipur City Jaipur dated 16.3.96, daily diary entries Nos. 638/dt.8.7.94, 957/dt. 12.7.94, & entry dated 13.7.94 of Malkhana register of Police Station Manak Chowk, Receipt of Malkhana articles dt. 22.7.94. daily diary entries Nos. 1497 and 1525/dated 18.7.94 and Malkhana register entries of PS Shastri Nagar, daily diary entries Nos. 1016 and 1032 dt. 17.8.94, and entries of Malkhana register dated 25.7.94 of Police Station Sodala be taken on record. He has further prayed that...
Jay Prakash and ors. Vs. Rpsc and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: 1997WLC(Raj)UC71; 1996(2)WLN692
M.G. Mukherji, C.J.1. By virtue of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated November 18, 1996 in Civil Appeal Nos. 15068-15071 15068-15071 of 1996 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 19541-44 of 1996, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer v. Shri Vikram Singh and 19 Ors. and the judgment dated September 24, 1996 as passed in Civil Appeal No. 13118 of 1996 arising out of SLP (C) No. 18487 of 1996, Chattar Singh and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. the judgment and order dated September 12, 1996 in DB Civil Writ Petition No. 2215 of 1996, stand set aside.2. In the judgment dated November 18, 1996 in Civil Appeal No. 15068-15071 15068-15071 of 1996, it was made clear in so far as the judgment dated September 12, 1996 of the Division Bench is concerned, that the controversy raised in the matter is already covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Chattar Singh and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. reported in JT 1996 SC (9) 466. The only question that arose for further decis...
Gopal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-18-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2162; 1997(2)WLC601
ORDERAmaresh Ku. Singh, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor for the State.This Criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the judgment dated 4th August, 1990 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer in Criminal Regular Case No. 433/ 87 State v. Gopal whereby the petitioner Gopal was convicted under Sections 52A read with 68A of the Copy Rights Act, 1957 and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and to further u rider go simple imprisonment for 2 months for default in payment of fine. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banner the petitioner has moved this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and prayed that the conviction as well as sentence passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banner be quashed and set aside.3. In the pe...
Chuna Ram and Six ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-18-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2727
ORDERS.C. Mital, J.1. The above named petitioners have filed this bail application Under Section 439, Cr.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 89/96 pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaur Camp Deedwana pertaining to F.I.R. No. 94 dated 14-9-1995, Police Station Khunkhuna Under Sections 302, 364, 365, 176 and 201 I.P.C. The learned Additional Sessions Judge Camp Deedwana has rejected the bail application of the petitioners vide order dated 28-9-1996. The petitioners moved first hail application No. 481/96 along with other co-accused persons, which was allowed to be withdrawn on the request with liberty to file a fresh bail application after the receipt of copies of the statements. The second bail application No. 1068/96 was rejected on 9-9-1996 along with Misc. Petition No. 26/96 Under Section 482, Cr.P.C. challenging the orders dated 25-3-1996 and 26-3-1996 taking cognizance by learned Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana. Now the petitioners have moved this third bail application.2. T...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »