Rajasthan Court July 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.
State of Rajasthan Vs. the Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-10-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)WLC426; 1996(2)WLN195
Mukul Gopal Mukherji, Acting C.J.1. This appeal is filed by the State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Revenue Department impugning a judgment and order dated December 12, 1995 whereby a learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application filed by the State of Rajasthan under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash an order of the Board of Revenue dated November 5, 1990 as well as a decree passed by the Assistant Collector, Nawa dated September 21, 1985. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application mainly on the ground of delay and further held that there was no infirmity in the order passed by the Assistant Collector as upheld by the Board of Revenue. Hence the special appeal before us.2. Admittedly, the land as recorded in Khasra No. 622 measuring 2836 bighas 9 biswas situated in village Nawa was entered as a government land in the revenue records, out of which a portion of 3 bighas was allotted to one Lalaram in Smt. year 2018 for three years. The set...
Bhika Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-09-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ193
D.C. Dalela, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21-1-1978 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sirohi, convicting the accused appellant for the offence under Section 302, IPC and sentencing in to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. two hundred in Sessions Case No. 60/1976.2. The appellant was tried for committing murder of his sister-in-law (Bhabhi) Mst. Nathu on 13-10-1976 in the village 'Jela'. The relations between the appellant and his real brother Poonma (husband of the deceased) were not happy. On the day of occurrence, deceased Nathu reprimanded the appellant for quarrelling with her children. It is alleged that the appellant felt aggrieved on such reprimand and, therefore, he picked up a lathi or 'danda' and dealt a blow on her. The blow fell on her head. She fell down injured and bleeded through mouth and nose. While she was being carried the hospital she succumbed to her injuries. The cause of the death, according to the opinion of the do...
Kishan Lal Vs. Krishna Sales
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-1996
Reported in: [1998]94CompCas786(Raj)
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. In both the cases, the order issuing process is being challenged with a common prayer to quash criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners. The petitions raise the following identical and important questions of law :(i) Whether a second complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'), based on a second cause of action on a subsequent presentation of the cheque for encashment is maintainable ?(ii) Whether service of the notice issued under Clause (b) of Section 138 on the drawer of the cheque is essential to give a cause of action for filing a complaint for the offence under Section 138 of the Act ?2. In order to appreciate the controversy raised in these petitions, the necessary facts may be stated which are as under :The complainant/non-petitioner, herein, filed two separate complaints on May 3, 1993, in the court of the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No, 8, Jaipur City, Jaipur, alleging therein that bot...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jaipur Udyog Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-1996
Reported in: [1997]227ITR345(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law arising out of its order dated April 3, 1981, in respect of the assessment year 1970-71 :' 1. Whether having confirmed the disallowance of garden expenses of Rs. 3,06,723, the Tribunal was justified to permit the assessee to produce further evidence and to , nd the case back to the Income-tax Officer for examination of evidence ? 2. Whether having confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on building at Bijawasan Garden, New Delhi, and on electric and water installations therein, the Tribunal was justified in restoring the issue to the Income-tax Officer and in directing that in case, on some fresh evidence, the Income-tax Officer thinks otherwise, he may re-examine the issue ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that extra-shift allowance equal to normal depreciation should be allowed of the full year in respect of the asset...
Jiya Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1423
A.K. Singh, J.1. Heard-learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor.2. This jail appeal has been filed against ' the judgment dated 27-9-1991 delivered by the learned -Additional District and Sessions, Judge, Barmer in Sessions Case No. 6/90 State v. Jiya Ram, by which the appellant was convicted under Sections 302, 397 and 450, I.P.C. and sentenced as below:(1) Under Section 302, I.P.C. -- Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/ -and rigorous imprisonment for two months in default of payment of fine.(2) Under Section 307, I.P.C. -- Rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and a fine of Rs. 500/- and rigorous imprisonment for 2 months in default of payment of fine.(3) Under Section 450 I.P.C. -- Rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 500/- and 2 months rigorous3. All the sentences were directed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Barmer to run concurrently.4. The facts of the case may be briefly summarised as below:On 15-12-1989 at a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jaipur Udyog Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1996
Reported in: [1997]225ITR1053(Raj)
V.K. Singhal, J.1. In respect of the assessment year 1967-68, the claim of extra shift allowance equal to normal depreciation has been made by the assessee. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, vide its order dated September 8, 1982, referred the following question of law arising out of its order dated October 31, 1980 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that extra shift allowance equal to normal depreciation should be allowed for the full year in respect of the assets which were used during the year for more than 30 days but less than 180 days ?'Vide letter dated November 29, 1971, the revised claim for extra shift allowance was made on the basis of Explanation (1) to the remarks appearing in remarks column against heading III, 'Machinery and plant' in Part I of Appendix I to the Income-tax Rules, 1962. It was claimed by the assessee that in this Explanation the extra shift allowance equal to normal shift depreciation will...
Gulam HussaIn Vs. the District Magistrate and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)WLC462; 1996(1)WLN489
V.S. Kokje, J.1. The petitioner was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 {for short 'the Act' hereinafter), by the District Magistrate, Banner by an Order dated August 14, 1995 passed in exercise of powers under Section 3(3) of the Act.2. The grounds of detention were communicated to the petitioner vide communication dated August 16, 1995. The petitioner made a representation against his detention to the Advisory Board on September 9, 1995.The representation was rejected by an Order dated October 4, 1995. It was confirmed under Section 12(1) of the Act by the State Government on October 8, 1995. The petitioner filed this petition on December 6, 1995 challenging his detention.3. The petitioner contends that the order of detention was passed in a mechanical manner without proper application of mind. It was contended that the petitioner was detained earlier also by the District Magistrate under the same provision and that Order was quashed by the High Court. The ...
Smt. Mani Vs. Kishan Lal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1996
Reported in: AIR1997Raj19; 1996(3)WLC409; 1996(1)WLN523
B.R. Arora, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the decree and judgment dated 12-3-92 passed by the learned single Judge, by which the learned single Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and maintained the decree and judgment dated 5-12-87 passed by the District Judge, Churu decreeing the plaintiffs suit for specific performance of the contract. 2. Plaintiff Kishan Lal, on 5-8-78, filed a suit for specific performance of the contract, against defendant Ganesh Narain alias Ganesh Ram in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Churu. The' suit was based onthe agreement (Ex.1) dated 16-11-70, by which defendant Ganesh Narain agreed to sell a Nohra situated in Churu for a consideration of Rs. 11,000/- and took, Rs. 2,000/- as advance from the plaintiff. It was further agreed that the payment of the remaining amount of Rs.9,000/- will be made within a period of one month from the date of execution of the agreement and on the receipt of this amount, Ganesh Narain alias Gan...
Administrator, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Vs. Gauri Shanker
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1996
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ1272Raj; 1996(2)WLN181
B.R. Arora, J. 1. These two revision petitions arise out of the judgment dated March 13, 1992 passed by the District Judge, Churu, by which the learned District Judge allowed the two appeals filed by workman Gauri Shanker and directed the employer (present petitioners) to make payment of Rs. 10,000/- to respondent Gauri Shanker for the period from July 1, 1981 to August 31, 1982 and Rs. 1000/- for the period from September 1, 1984 to December 18, 1984 and fix him in the regular pay scale admissible to the Class IV employee and after fixation, make the payment of the balance amount to Gauri Shanker within the period of three months. The learned District Judge further directed that if the payment is not made within the stipulated period then the workman will be entitled to interest @ 12% per annum on this amount. Since both the revision petitions arise out of the same judgment and raise the same controversy between the same parties, though for different period, they are, therefore, being...
Pingla Devi and ors. Vs. Gopal Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-03-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ1020
Gopal Lal Gupta, J.1. The aforesaid three appeals arise out of the award dated 27.2.1991 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, awarding a sum of Rs. 47,500/- in Claim Case No. 644 of 1989, Rs. 3,23,800/- in Claim Case No. 484 of 1989 and Rs. 4,85,800/- in Claim Case No. 297 of 1989.2. The accident had taken place on 27.1.1989. Mahesh Chandra, B.L. Talang, injured Bhanwar Lal and others were going in a jeep towards Dholpur. It was alleged that the driver of the jeep drove it rashly and negligently and the jeep went in the kacha and dashed against a tree. Mahesh Chandra and B.L. Talang suffered grievous injuries and died on the spot. Bhanwar Lal also suffered injuries. In the reply it was averred that the driver had to go on the kacha road because a truck was coming in fast speed and in order to avoid the accident when he applied brakes the jeep dashed against the tree. The Tribunal framed five issues in each case. After recording the evidence and hearing the par...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »