Rajasthan Court October 1999 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.
Avdhesh Khokhar Vs. Principal, Dayanand Public School and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Raj72; 2000(1)WLC493
ORDERB.J. Shethna, J.1. The petitioner, who is a student, has filed this petition in July, 1997 and prayed that the respondents be directed to declare his result of Senior Secondary Examination held in November, 1995 and issue him correct, true and relevant marks-sheet of the said Examination.2. Reply-affidavit has been filed in this case on behalf of the respondents Nos. 2 and 3, wherein several contentions have been raised, One of the foremost contentions raised by the learned counsel Mr. Mehta, for the respondents Nos. 2 and 3, at the time of hearing of this petition, was that the petitioner-student deposited the fees late, i.e., 28-11-95, after the Examination commenced on 20-11-95. Thus, the submission was that from the very threshold, the petitioner-student was not entitled or eligible to appear in the Examination, therefore, there is no question of declaring his result. It was also submitted by the learned counsel Mr. Mehta for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 that two important conditi...
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Tushar Harit (P) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-05-1999
Reported in: (2001)68TTJ(NULL)659
ORDERT. V. Rajagopala RaoThis is a revenue's appeal for assessment year 1989-90 against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), dated 18-1-1994. The only point for consideration in this appeal is whether the central subsidy granted to the assessee, which is a company and which is running a hotel towards central investment subsidy of Rs. 7,63,000 are liable to the deducted from the WDV while claiming depreciation.2. On behalf of the department, it is contended that the matter though decided in favour of the assessee by following the case of CIT v. P.J. Chemicals : [1994]210ITR830(SC) , and Rajasthan High Court, the department still objects to accept the decision for the reason that the facts are not fully gone into. Further, the learned Departmental Representative contended that after P.J. Chemical's decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had the occasion to consider in a later decision in case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. v. CIT : 1997ECR787(SC) and the ratio of the said decision appea...
Babu Ahmed Khan and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ444
Mohd. Yamin, J. 1. Babu Ahmed Khan and Nafis Ahmed appellants were convicted by learned Sessions Judge, Churu vide his judgment dated 26-6-1982 for offence under Section 363, IPC and each one of them was sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 50/- and in default to undergo two months' simple imprisonment. They have assailed their conviction and sentences by this appeal.2. Briefly stated, on 27-4-1980 at 3.00 A.M. Surendra Nath Bhatnagar reported to Station House Officer, Kotwali, Churu vide report Ex. P/6 that his daughter Arti Bhatnagar, who was living with his relation Ratish Mohan Bhatnagar at Churu, was missing. Surendra Nath Bhatnagar was a inspector with Commercial Taxes Department at Sikar. He reached Sikar on 25-4-1980 in order to fetch his family members. Arti, who was in her room, was not found therein when he woke up at about 01.00 A.M. He suspected that the appellants with the help of their friend had kidnapped Arti. They took her away with intent ...
Dr. Prem Mittal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-01-1999
Reported in: II(2000)DMC66; 2000(1)WLC531
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material available on the record of the lower Court.2. Dr. Prem Chand Mittal, the petitioner was married with Smt. Saroj Garg respondent No. 1 on December 12,1990 at Alwar according to rites and tenets of Hindu religion. Both were residents of Alwar and comfortably settled in life also; the petitioner as a Medical Officer in the Medical and Health Department and the respondent as Lecturer in College Education Department of the State of Rajasthan. On 5.12.1991 the couple was blessed with a daughter-Akshita.3. On 26.8.1997 Smt. Saroj Garg filed a complaint against the petitioner and Smt. Sunita @ Baby and her father Dr. H.C. Goyal, respondent Nos. 3 and 4 respectively alleging therein that since after two days of the marriage the petitioner had started harassing and treating her with cruelty on account of demand for dowry that he used to take all emoluments in order to help and support of his brother's family tha...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›