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.
Charan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1390; 1997(1)WLC370; 1996(2)WLN495
ORDERM.A.A. Khan, J.1. In this case Charan Singh, petitioner was caught red handed on May 23, 1988 at 6 p.m. by P.W.3 Om Prakash Yadav, Excise Inspector and P.W. 2 Rati Ram, Constable while he was manufacturing illicit liquor, an excisable article, on a working still at the bank of a river near a hillock situated at about 1 k.m.. away from village Baghoda under Police Station Ghoda, District Alwar. He was tried for having committed the offence under Sections 16/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The learned trial Magistrate found the petitioner guilty for the said offence and convicted him as such. The petitioner was accordingly sentenced to six months' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to further undergo R.I. for two months more. In appeal the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kishangarh Bas, Alwar confirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner as recorded by the learned trial Magistrate. Hence, this petition under Section 397, Cr....
Vinay Kumar Vs. University of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC251; 1996(2)WLN490
Arun Madan, J.1. The petitioner who is a diploma holder Engineer has moved this Court by way of present writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India on the grounds inter- alia that the respondent University being a statutory body and hence amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court and falls within the ambit of Article 12 of the Constitution of India as defined under Section 2(J) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. The petitioner was appointed as a daily wager @ Rs. 40/- per day with regard to the construction and completion of a particular project undertaken by the University for construction of Gymnasium building w.e.f. 22.1.90. Thereafter the petitioner has been continuously discharging his duties assigned to him in respect of that project and the said project has not been completed though it should have been completed by November, 1996. The grievance of the petitioner in short is that he is entitled to be fixed in the regular pay scale as admissible to regular...
Kuldeep Dhankar Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)WLC589; 1996(2)WLN503
M.G. Mukherji, C.J.1. This revision application by Kuldeep Dhanker against Union of India through General Manager, Telecommunication, District Jaipur has been filed impugning an order dated July 8, 1993 passed by the District Judge, Jaipur City in Civil Misc. Case No. 345/91 whereby the learned District Judge instead of appointing an independent arbitrator as prayed for by the plaintiff-petitioner appointed over again the Member (T.O.), Directorate of Telecommunication, New Delhi as Arbitrator with a further direction upon him that he should himself act as Arbitrator and give an award within 4 months.2. The plaintiff came to the court with the case that the Jaipur Telecommunication District invited tenders for publishing telephone Directory (English Edition) of Jaipur and the plaintiff petitioner gave a tender which was accepted. There was an agreement dated October 6, 1987 in between the General Manager, Telecommunication, District Jaipur on the one hand and the plaintiff petitioner o...
Kota Steel Rerolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)WLN493
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The petitioner has challenged has levy of service charge and interest therein. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that no service charges could be collected because the land was allotted by the State Government and at that time there was no such stipulation to make the payment of service charges.2. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that under the RIICO Disposal of Land Rules, 1979 it is provided that the service charges if any, imposed or may here-in-after imposed by imposed by the Corporation shall be payable by the allottee in addition to land, every year in advance by the end of April each year. The right of the Corporation to revise the rate of service charges was reserved and it was provided that the decision of the Corporation shall be final, conclusive and binding on the allottee and shall not be questioned in any court of law or otherwise.3. In the notification dated 13.7.1982 the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Industrial Area Al...
Rameshwar Lal and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Raj213; 1996(2)WLN485
ORDERB.J. Shethna, J.1. All the petitioners have challenged the notice/order dt./- 20-11-96 issued by the District Excise Officer in these petitions. It was issued in view of the fact that there was an alarming rate of increase in road accidents because of the drivers of heavy vehicles like trucks and luxury buses plying on the roads after consuming liquor from the liquor shops running on the main roads or highWay. The licence of all the petitioners-shop owners is expiring in March, 1997. The grievance of the petitioners is that they have invested a lot of money in it and if they are asked to shift the strops immediately then they would suffer a great hardship because it will not be possible for them to find out the alternative accommodation immediately. These petitions have been vehemently objected by the respondent on several grounds viz., (i) that the petitioners have the alternative remedy by way of statutoryappeal before the appellate authority against the impugned notice/order; (...
Kanahiya Lal Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: II(1997)DMC98; 1996(2)WLN487
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. This petition for habeas corpus has been filed by the father of the detenue-Sangeeta on the averment that although she is living in the custody of her husband Rajan-respondent No. 5 herein, she has been subjected to intolerable torture. The! details in this regard have been given out in the petition wherein the petitioner has stated that his daughter Smt. Sangeeta is disgusted with the kind of life she is compelled to lead at her husband's place since her husband and her brother-in-law (husband's elder brother) have been demanding valuables like television!, motor-cycle and other articles and also cash amount of Rs. 50,000/-. She is also prevented from meeting her father and on and off she is severely beaten up, at times with electric wire. It has been alleged that the detenue's father came to know about his daughter's plight from an un-known source due to which he tried to meet his daughter-Sangeeta, but the respondents No. 5 and 6 did not allow her to meet him, ...
Patram Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)WLC590; 1996(2)WLN489
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. A reply has been filed on behalf of the non- petitioners.2. Heard. Perused the relevant record. The petitioner-Patram was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City, by his Judgment dated 6.2.76 passed in Sessions Case No. 158/74 for the offence Under Section 302/149 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine further undergo R.I. for one month. He was also convicted for the offences Under Sections 147/307 & 323 IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 1 1/2 years, 3 years and six months respectively.3. Initially he was undergoing sentence in Central Jail, Jaipur, but since he hailed from District-Murena, at his own request he was transferred to Central Jail, Gwalior. As per reply filed by the non-petitioners; as on 30.9.96 the petitioner had already suffered sentence for a period of 11 years, 8 months and 14 days. He had also earned remission of 4 years 5 months and 19 days. Thus on 30.9.96, he had alr...
Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Bachhu Bhai Shanti Bhai and
Court: Sales Tax Tribunal STT Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-14-1996
Reported in: (1998)111STC140Tribunal
1. In compliance with the order dated September 27, 1983 of the honourable Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, the Revenue Board, Ajmer, by its order dated March 26, 1984, had referred the following four questions to the Rajasthan High Court for answering by it : 1. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the making of the partners as parties is necessary as the dissolution of the firm has taken place only at the time of filing of application under Section 14(1) of the RST Act 2. Whether the non-mention of the names of the partners is fatal to the case specially when the name of the firm was in existence at the tune of assessment and also at the time of appeal 3. Whether the Board of Revenue, under the facts and circumstances of the case, was correct in not allowing the amendment of the application under Section 14(1) of the RST Act, by the assessing authority by adding the names of the partners 4. Whether the appearance of the counsel for the non-applicant dis...
Satya NaraIn Vs. Smt. Mamta and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-12-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Raj118; I(1998)DMC23; 1997WLC(Raj)UC50
Bhagwati Prasad, J. 1. Thehusband-appellant is aggrieved by the dissolution of marriage by adecree of divorce granted by the Family Court, Udaipur from the respondent-wife Smt. Mamta. The respondent-wife Smt. Mamta filed divorce petition on the grounds that ever since they were married the appellant-husband started pressurising her to get more offerings from her parents. He started beating her and he went even to the extent of turning her outof the house. In this process, the husband came into contact with another lady Saroj, who was an employee in the Medical Department and started living with her. Not only did he start living with the said Saroj, out of their relationship a daughter was also born. According to the allegations of wife-respondent, a son was born from the wedlock and this child was taken away by the husband and he kept the child with Smt. Saroj at her place of service. The defendant-husband contested the petition. He denied that he has ever ill-treated the wife. She has...
Om Prakash Vs. Smt. Madhu Alias Laxmi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-12-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Raj214
Bhagwati Prasad, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-husband feeling aggrieved against the rejection of his divorce petition.2. Case of the appellant in the divorce petition was that the marriage between the parties was solemnized when they were minors. The respondent wife had come to the place of the appellant only for 2-3 days and then it was decided that it will be after the parties get major that ceremony of 'gona' will be performed. It was also the case of the appellant that marriage has not been consummated between the parties. The appellant stated that when the parties became major, the appellant went to bring the respondent-wife to matrimonial home but he was refused. The appellant went again after 15 days but he was refused the company of the respondent even to the extent that the respondent refused the company of the appellant saying that she does not even remember that marriage was ever solemnized between the parties, now she has become major and she will decide...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »