Rajasthan Court November 2001 Judgments
Dwarka Prasad Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1278; RLW2003(1)Raj461; 2002(2)WLC149; 2002(4)WLN386
Misra, J.1. This habeas corpus petition has been filed by one Dwarka Prasad who came up with a case that her daughter Vedwati Kumari Sharma whose age is stated to be 13 years, has been missing ever since March 2001 for which an FIR No. 44/2001 was registered under Section 363 and 379 of the IPC. The accused who is alleged to have kidnapped the girl is Rajesh Sharma- respondent No. 3 herein. If appears that the police did not take any action to trace out the girl nor submitted the charge-sheet in FIR No. 22/2001. The father of the abducted girl was therefore compelled to file this habeas corpus petition for tracing out her daughter, on which a show cause notice was issued by this Court. After practically this court monitpred the investigation of the afored said FIR, the abducted girl Vedwati Kumari Sharma has been produced in this Court although only three days back on 26.11.2001, the respondents were not in a position to inform the whereabouts of this girl to this Court.2. It is unfort...
Tag this Judgment!Asstt. Cit Vs. Shyam Sunder Chhugani
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: (2002)74TTJ(NULL)26
ORDERS.R. Chauhan, J.M.As the above appeals are inter-related and involve common points so we are disposing them of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. ITA Nos. 2255/Jp/95, 727/Jp/96, 1113/Jp/94 and 230/Jp/95 are appeals by revenue for assessment years 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92, respectively, and are directed against the order of Deputy Commissioner, Jodhpur, dated 9-10-1995, 29-1-1996, 2-11-1993, and 28-11-1994, respectively.3. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and perused the records including written statement of the learned authorised representative of assessee furnished before us.4. First we take up 1113/Jp/94 being for assessment year 1990-91 for the reason that the main order of learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) has stated to have been passed therein.5. Ground No. 1 disputes the reduction of addition of Rs. 25,500 to 7,800 made on account of low household withdrawals. The learned Departmental Representative of revenue has referred to p...
Tag this Judgment!Vinita and ors. Vs. Shri Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-28-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ119; 2002WLC(Raj)UC93
J.C. Verma, J.1. This misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 20.9.1996 by Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur, whereby the compensation of only Rs. 5,25,700 was awarded in M.A.C.T. Case No. 821 of 1992.2. The facts of the case are that the claim application was filed by the widow, minor children and father of the deceased Girdhari Lal for the compensation because of the death of the deceased Girdhari Lal in accident on 2.11.1992 when he was hit from behind by DCM Toyota RJ 14-G 2000. Girdhari Lal was seriously injured. He was removed to SMS Hospital where he died. The claim application was filed claiming Rs. 36,50,000 as compensation.3. After framing the required issues the Tribunal had given the finding that the accident was caused because of negligent driving of the offending vehicle. However, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation only of Rs. 5,25,700. Being aggrieved the claimants have filed the appeal for enhancement of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Rishabhdev Textiles
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2001
Reported in: 2002(141)ELT352(Raj)
ORDERRajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties.2. This application is under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. This has arisen because the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'CEGAT') by its order dated 20-2-2001 has rejected the applicant's application under Section 35G(3) of the Act of 1944. An application to refer the following question said to be arising out of its appellate order to this Court for its opinion has been made :-'Does the learned Tribunal has the power to allow the benefit of Modvat credit to the goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 which are otherwise not specifically mentioned in the Rule itself ?'3. The question has been raised in the context of the facts and circumstances about which there is no dispute that the articles in question are voltage regulators. The assesses has claimed Modvat credit of Rs. 30,320/- in respect of excise duty paid on voltage regulators used by...
Tag this Judgment!Harvinder Singh and ors. Vs. Gurdeo Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj416; 2002(2)WLN32
Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the impugned order by which application under order 6 Rule 17 of the defendant-non-petitioner was allowed by the trial court.2. The defendant submitted an application for amendment of the written statement wherein the defendant-non-petitioner stated that the land in dispute was originally belonging to his father and his father has also received the above land in succession and in exchange of the land, therefore, in view of the nature of the title of the property and succession, the defendant is not the sole owner of the property and defendant's sons and daughters are also having their shares in the property. It is stated by the defendant that the defendant is illeterate person and was not having the knowledge of the legal position and he has no knowledge that he alone had no right to sell the property and when the sons of the defendant raised objection he came to know about this position. According to defendant the admission ma...
Tag this Judgment!Manju Vs. Mahavir Prasad JaIn and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2001
Reported in: I(2002)ACC363; 2002ACJ363; 2002WLC(Raj)UC129
J.C. Verma, J.1. The present misc. appeal has been preferred for enhancement of the compensation against the award dated 12.2.98 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bayana, Distt. Bharatpur in Claim Application No. 123 of 1995, whereby the amount Rs. 83,100 has been awarded as compensation, whereas the claimant had claimed a total amount of Rs. 9,69,000.2. The claimant had met with the accident on 7.11.1995 when she was hit by the truck No. RSD 4401. The right leg of the claimant was crushed resulting in amputation below the knee. The truck was insured with respondent No. 3. After framing the necessary issues the Tribunal had come to the finding that the accident was caused due to negligent driving of the driver of truck. After considering the oral and documentary evidence the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 75,000 for pain and suffering and Rs. 8,100 on other counts. As such, the total compensation Rs. 83,100 has been awarded.3. For the reason that the present appeal has been filed fo...
Tag this Judgment!Javid Vs. Lalji Yadav and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2001
Reported in: I(2002)ACC702; 2002ACJ702; 2002WLC(Raj)UC143
J.C. Verma, J.1. The present misc. appeal has been preferred for enhancement of compensation against the award dated 21.1.1995 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur in the Claim Application No. 684 of 1992, whereby the amount of Rs. 1,12,000 has been awarded as compensation, whereas the claimant had claimed an amount of Rs. 7,10,000.2. The claimant had met with the accident on 23.7.1992 when he was hit by the minibus No. RSO 6604. He was seriously injured and his left leg was amputated from the knee. As per medical evidence the injured sustained permanent disability to the extent of 75 per cent in childhood. After framing the necessary issues the Tribunal had come to the finding that the accident was caused due to negligent driving of the driver of minibus. After considering the oral and documentary evidence the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1,00,000 for pain and suffering and Rs. 12,000 on other counts. As such the total compensation of Rs. 1,12,000 has been aw...
Tag this Judgment!Bhuri and ors. Vs. Shankar Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ2007
J.C. Verma, J.1. This misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants for enhancement of compensation against the order dated 23.2.1995 passed by Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur in MACT Case No. 930 of 1991 whereby the compensation of only Rs. 1,09,500 has been awarded.2. The facts of the case are that the claim application was filed by the claimants, legal heirs of the deceased Sitaram Yadav, who died in the motor accident on 7/8.6.1991 in midnight when he was going on motor cycle and was hit by truck No. RRZ 1845. After recording the evidence the Tribunal has awarded the compensation Rs. 1,09,500 only with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.3. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the deceased was of the age of 35 years and he was doing the business of selling milk by collecting it from buffalo owners. When the accident occurred the milk drums were also loaded on the motor cycle. The Tribunal has not assessed the income of deceased proper...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bhuri and ors. Vs. Shankar Lal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2001
Reported in: I(2003)ACC50
J.C. Verma, J.1. This Misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant for enhancement of compensation against the order dated 23.2.1995 passed by Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur in MACT Case No,. 930/ 1991 whereby the compensation of only Rs. 1,09,500/- has been awarded.2. The facts of the case are that the claim application was filed by the claimants legal heirs of deceased Sitaram Yadav, who died in the accident on 7/8.6.1991 in midnight when he was going on motor cycle and was hit by truck No. RRZ 4845. After recording the evidence the Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs. 1,09,500/- only with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.3. Learned Counsel for the claimants submits that the deceased was of the age of 35 years and he was doing the business of selling milk by collecting it from buffalo owners. When the accident was occurred, the milk drums were also loaded on the motor cycle. The Tribunal has not assessed the income of deceased properly as it h...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Lal and ors. Vs. Bhawani Shanker and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-26-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLC484
ORDERArun Madan, J. 1. The abovenoted revision petition Is directed against the order dt. 26-4-1997 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division). Anta (Baran) in CO No. 157/96 whereby the plaintiffs' (respondents) application under Order 8. Rule 6, CPC was allowed excluding the counter claim filed by the petitioners/defendants.2. The facts which are relevant for deciding this revision petition briefly stated are that on 10-4-95 the plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents') filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendants (hereinafter referred to 'as the petitioners') seeking the relief In the nature of permanent injunction to the following effect:-(Vernacular matter omitted - Ed.)3. The above suit was contested by the petitioners by filing a joint written statement/counter claim on 16-5-1995 seeking the following reliefs :-(Vernacular matter omitted - Ed.)4. It is pertinent to mention herein that without filing any written statement to the counter cla...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »