Rajasthan Court April 1997 Judgments
Bhagwan Swaroop Srivastava Vs. Smt. Asha Srivastava and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-10-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ265
ORDERA.S. Godara, J. 1. This transfer petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 407, Cr. P.C. pleading that Smt. Raka Srivastava, non-petitioner No. 2, filed a complaint under Section 494, I.P.C. against the petitioner as well as Smt. Asha Srivastava, non-petitioner No. 1, and Bhairon Prasad, non-petitioner No. 4 etc. in the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial Magistrate No. 4 Jodhpur, titled as Smt. Raka Srivastava v. Bhagwan Swaroop and 6 others and registered vide S. No. 142/92. It was alleged by the complainant Smt. Raka Srivastava that the accused-petitioner during the subsistence of her marriage with the present petitioner, with the aid and abetment of the co-accused persons knowing that the petitioner was already validly married with the complainant, again married with Smt. Asha Srivastava. After due enquiry, the learned trial Magistrate took cognizance of offence under Section 494, I.P.C. against the accused-persons including Smt. Asha Srivastava and th...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdhatri Coke Manufacturers, Govindpur Vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd., Udaip ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Raj182
ORDERP.P. Naolekar, J. 1. The petitioner is the owner of Hard Coke Plant and is carrying on business of manufacturing and sale of Beehive/ Metallurgical Coke. Respondent No. 1 Hindustan Zinc Ltd. is a Govt. of India enterprise. The practice of respondent No. 1 is to invite open tender for getting supply of Metallurgical Coke for its Tundoo and Vizag Smelters situated in Dhanbad (Bihar) and Visakhapatnam (Andhra Pfadesh). In pursuance of the aforesaid practice, respondent No. 1 invited tender being tender No. HZL/ HO/ CONT/4(33) dated 16-7-1996 for supply of 5000 M.T. Metallurgical Coke of the specified specification for Tundoo and Vizag Smelters. The petitioner submitted his tender and deposited the amount of Rs. one lac. As per instruction No. 8 of the said tender, three parties did not submit C.F.R.I, reports along with the tender, though it was essential for checking the quality of the coke. Only one party furnished C.F.R.I. report and the quality of coke offered by that party was n...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi Raj Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ557
ORDERP.C. Jain, J. 1. This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401, Cr. P.C. is directed against the judgment dated 27-11-1987 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pali whereby he reversed the judgment dated 6-6-1985 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pali taking cognizance against non-petitioner No. 2.2. The brief facts are that the complainant-petitioner filed a complaint against non-petitioner No. 2 along with some other persons alleging therein that he was the Khatedar tenant of agricultural land bearing Khasra No. 1304 measuring 3 bighas. In the year 1976, the complainant made certain improvements on the said agricultural land by putting stone slabs around the above land. It appears that the concerned Tehsildar initiated proceedings under Section 90-A and 91 of the Land Revenue act but the same were dropped on 3-8-1976 on the ground that putting of stone slabes was only an act of improvement. It was alleged by the petitioner that during the intervening p...
Tag this Judgment!Birla Cement Works Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-1997
Reported in: (1997)139CTR(Raj)540
B.R. ARORA, J. :The petitioner, a manufacturer of cement, is a public limited company, whose registered office is at Calcutta and the factory/works is at Chittorgarh. The cement manufactured by the petitioner factory is being transported to the different destinations with the assistance of approved transport operators/companies. The petitioner did not deduct the tax at source (TDS) on the payments made to the transporters under S. 194C of the IT Act, therefore, a letter dt. 18th March, 1995 was issued to the petitioner company by the ITO (TDS), Chittorgarh requesting and reminding it to deduct the TDS from the payments made to the transport contractors in accordance with Circular No. 681, dt. 8th March, 1994.2. No deduction of the TDS was made by the petitioner company under S. 194C of the IT Act as according to the petitioner it was not obliged to deduct the amount of TDS under S. 194C of the Act from the payments made to the transport companies as the provisions are not applicable to...
Tag this Judgment!Mangla Ram Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-09-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)WLC530; 1997(1)WLN654
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The. petitioner has challenged in this petition the impugned order dated 11.5.89 (Annex. 1) passed by the Board of Revenue as well as the order at annex. 2 dated 13.12.83 passed by R.A.A. and the impugned cancellation order dated 19.2.80.2. The petitioner, who was an agriculturist, having land, was initially allotted land in question on temporary basis in 1973. Thereafter, permanent allotment of the said land was made in his favour on 30.8.74 under the Rajasthan Colonisation (Allotment and Sale of Govt. Land in Rajasthan Canal Colony Area) Rules, 1975. On a complaint made by one Sukhia, his allotment was cancelled by the allotting authority by an order dated 19.2.80 after giving him a notice to show cause as to why his allotment should not be cancelled. Aggrieved of that order, the petitioner filed an appeal before R.A.A. which was dismissed by order at Annex. 2 and the revision was also dismissed by the Board of Revenue by an order at Annex. 1, which are under chall...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Vimla Sharma Vs. Registrar, Co-operative Societies and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-07-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)WLN490
S.K. Sharma, J.1. Rule 67 of Manual of Civil Court Rules, 1986 provides that when issuing a commission for making a local investigation under Order XXVI, Rule 9, the Court shall define the points on which the Commissioner has to report. No point which can conveniently and ought to be substantiated by the parties by evidence at the trial shall be referred to the Commissioner.2. In the case on the plaintiff petitioner filed an application under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for appointing a Commissioner in order to establish the existing state of disputed plot existed in the year 1982. The plaintiff prayed in the application that a Commissioner be appointed to examine the state of the state of the disputed land according to the record.3. I am of the view that the plaintiff can produce the evidence in this regard and it is not necessary to appoint a Commissioner under the provisions contained under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC.4. I see no jurisdictional error in the impugned order passed by the trial Co...
Tag this Judgment!D.P. Choudhary and ors. Vs. Kumari Manjulata
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Raj170
Mohd. Yamin, J. 1. This is a civil appeal against the judgment and decree passed by Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur on 6-9-80 whereby he decreed the suit No. 14/78 of defamation awarding Rs. 10,000/- as damages to the respondent. 2. Kumari Manjulata is the daughter of Mohan Singh. She was aged about 17 years and was living with her parents and brother. They are all educated. Even the plaintiff was a student of B.A. and her mother was M.A. B.Ed. Her father Mohan Singh was M.A. M.Com. and M.Ed, and employed as Senior Teacher. Her brother was a student of University. Thus the plaintiff respondent was a member of distinguished family. In Jodhpur the community of Malis to which the plaintiff respondent belonged was an uneducated community, therefore, the family of the plaintiff respondent was regarded very high being an educated family. Durga Prasad appellant (since deceased) was the principal Editor of Dainik Navjyoti while appellant No. 2 Deen Bahdhu Choudhary was the Managing Ed...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Kumar Ajmera and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Raj250
B.R. Arora, J. 1. This writ petition and the other eleven writ petitions mentioned in the Schedule, raise the common controversies, namely (i) the validity of Section 19 (L) read with Section 39 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994; (ii) the legality and correctness of the orders passed by the respective Chief Executive Officer, by which the petitioners were declared disqualified; and (iii) the jurisdiction of the Chief Executive Officer to hold an enquiry in the matter of declaring a Panch or a Member of the Panchayat Raj Institution to continue as the Sarpanch as he has incurred the disqualification on account of birth of an additional child in the family raising the number of the children to more than two. As all these writ petitions involve the common questions of law and facts, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The petitioner was declared elected as the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Banera (district Bhilwara) on 4-2-95. While he was acting as the...
Tag this Judgment!Bajaj Hindustan Limited and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Raj262
M.G. Mukherji, C.J. 1. M/s. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. transferred its factory and other properties situated in the District of Udaipur to M/s. JK Udaipur Udyog Ltd. in the year 1993. M/s JK Udaipur Udyog the transferee-Company submitted an application Under Section 31 of the Stamp Act before the Collector, Stamps, Udaipur along with documents for adjudication of the stamp duty which might be payable for such transfer. The Collector, Stamps on receipt of the application for adjudication made site inspection of the properties on 17-9-1993 and looking to the bulk magnitude of different properties he gave a notice dated 18-9-1993 to M/s. JK Udaipur Udyog Ltd. to submit necessary information for determining the market value of the properties which were transferred under various deeds. M/s. JK Udaipur Udyog Ltd. instead of complying with the requirements of the notice dated 18-9-1993 went on requesting for adjournment of hearing from time to time and finally filed an application dated 3-11-1993 b...
Tag this Judgment!Ayub Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ132
S.C. Mital, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1985) passed against the appellant in Sessions Case No. 178/94. The appellant has been sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 1,00,000/- fine and in default to further suffer 2 years rigorous imprisonment.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that Shri Azad Kumar Sharma, Dy. S. P., Bhilwara received source information during the night 20-3-94 and 21 -3-1994 that a person with opium in his possession was present at the bus stand. The information was reduced into writing as Ex. P. 3. Dy. S. P. Shri Azad Kumar Sharma went to the Bus Stand with two motbirs and saw a person out side the enquiry office of the Bus Stand with a black coloured bag in his right' hand. On interrogation, he disclosed his name as Ayub Khan son of Rula Ji Musalman Gujar, resident of Bapoli, District, Panipat ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »