Rajasthan Court December 2001 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.
Aditya Cement Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(141)ELT623(Raj); 2003(2)WLN258
N.N. Mathur, J.1. This reference application under Section 35H of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is made by the M/s. Aditya Cement, a Unit of Grasim Industries Limited seeking questions of law as framed in Para 14E arising out of the order dated 21-5-2001 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as 'CEGAT'.2. At the outset, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Counsel for the department that the question of law, which is sought to be called for reference for the Tribunal has been answered by the Apex Court in Jaypee Rewa Cement v. Commissioner of Central Excise reported in : 2001ECR193(SC) . Though it is agreed by both the learned Counsel for the parties that the question involved has been settled by the Apex Court and, as such, the Reference can be straightway answered but the requirement of law is that this Court will have to first call the statement of case from the Tribunal and refer the ques...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Mahaveer Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj468; 2002(4)WLC445; 2002(4)WLN597
Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 20.7.87 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused respondent for offence under Section 376 and 342 I.P.C. 2. This appeal arises in the following circumstances: (i) On 6.4.86 at about 3 a.m. P.W. 2 Ladu W/o Bheru (hereinafter referred to as the Prosecutrix) lodged a written report Ex.P/1 with the Police Station Kachhola, District Bhilwara stating that on 5.4.86 at about 3 p.m. when she was in the house of Sita Ram Khatik and was going some labour work of lime, the accused respondent came there and stopped her near the gate and after closing the door, caught hold of her hand and thereafter committed rape with her. After hearing her cries P.W. 3 Mst. Nandu came there and seeing her, he ran away. 3. On this report police chalking out regular FIR Ex.P/1 and started investigation. 4. During inves...
Smt. Raj Kumari @ Chandrakala Vs. Nandlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj419; 2002(4)WLC474
Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the impugned order.2. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 5.10.95 passed by the court of District Judge, Churu in Civil Misc. Case No. 22/94 whereby the trial court allowed the application for divorce of the petitioner-respondent against the appellant and granted the decree for divorce.3. Brief facts of the case are that in present divorce petition, which was filed before the court below the learned counsel for the appellant filed the power on 17th April, 1995. On that day the trial court fixed the date of reconciliation between the parties on 20th May, 1995. On that day both the parties were absent, therefore, matter was adjourned and fixed on 15th July, 1995 for reconciliation. The non-petitioner-appellant did not turn up. The matter was again adjourned and date was fixed on 26th August, 1995. On 26th August, 1995 learned counsel for the appellant-non-petitio...
Aditya Cement and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj372; 2002(5)WLC243
Mathur, J.1. This Reference Application under Section 35H of the Centra! Excise Act, 19-14 is made by the M/s. Aditya Cement, a Unit of Grasim Industries Limited seeking questions of law as framed in para 14-E arising out of the order dated 21.5.2001 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as 'CEGAT'.2. At the outset, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned counsel for the department that the question of law, which is sought to be called for reference for the Tribunal has been answered by the Apex Court in Jaypee Rewa Cement v. Commissioner of Central Excise (1). Though it is agreed by both the learned counsel for the parties that the question involved has been settled by the Apex Court and, as such, the Reference can be straightway answered but the requirement of law is that this court will have to first call the statement of case from the Tribunal and refer the question of law. Thus, this Court...
Rajendra Textiles Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj546
Panwar, J.1. This is appeal is directed against the order dated 14.11.1990 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Camp at Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby application (suit) filed by the appellant against the respondents was dismissed.2. Briefly stated facts which are necessary for decision of this appeal are that; a suit was filed by the appellant before the Court of District Judge, Jodhpur for recovery of Rs. 32,872.35 which was transferred to the Tribunal established under Section 24 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. The case as set up by the appellant before the Tribunal is that; appellant firm had booked bales of cloth on 23.7.1986 by parcel train from Jodhpur to Hindaun City vide PWB No. 699790 dt.23.7.1986. PWB was 'self'. The appellant had sent the PWB to State Bank of India, Hindaun City with the instruction that the bilty be handed over to M/s. Gupta Cloth Store, Hindaun City on payment of Rs. 23,958.27. M/s. Gupta Cloth Store did not...
Phool Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(3)WLN635
O.P. Bishnoi, J.1. This is an appeal filed against the judgment dated 25.2.1984 by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar whereby the accused appellant Phool Singh was found guilty Under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and was awarded 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/- for the said offence. For non-payment of fine he was ordered to undergo six months rigorous 'imprisonment. Rs. 1500/- were ordered to be paid to the prosecutrix P.W.-4 Smt. Nathi after the amount of fine was deposited by the appellant.2. The facts of the case are few and can be stated briefly.3. On 4.4.1983 at 5.30 P.M. P.W.-5 Bhimaram (husband of the prosecutrix) went to police station Raghunathgarh and lodged a typed report Ex.P/6, according to which his wife Smt. Nathi was raped by the accused on 29.3.1983 at about 7-8 PM in the jungle of village 'Jerthi' where she had gone to ease herself. According to the report certain persons were playing football nearby who came on the spot. P.W.-3 Durgadatt, Rajendra, K...
Shree Fats and Proteins Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: [2006]146STC310(Raj)
M.R. Calla J.1. Through this group of writ petitions, numbering 29, the petitioners have challenged the provisions of Sub-clause (2)(d) of the validation Clause 120 of the Finance Act, 2000 (Act No. 10 of 2000) be declared to be violative of Articles 14 and 19(l)(g) of the Constitution of India and of Section 9(2B) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The challenge to the validity of the aforesaid provisions is coupled with the prayer that the notice for demand of interest may also be declared to be illegal, without jurisdiction and against the principles of natural justice. Whereas the common questions of law are involved in all these matters based on identical facts, we propose to decide all these matters by this common judgment and order as under. The reference shall be made to the pleadings of the parties from D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4674 of 2001 and D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1165 of 2001 only as leading cases, while deciding this group of 29 petitions. D.B. Civil Writ Petit...
Rameshwar Lal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLN581
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 18.7.1988 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh camp Suratgarh in Sessions Case No. 35/86 by which he convicted the accused appellant of the charges for the offence under Sections 376 and 450 I.P.C. and sentenced in the following manner:Name of accused Convicted Sentence awarded appellant under SectionRameshwarlal 376 I.P.C. Seven years RI and to pay fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months' RI. 450 I.P.C. Five years' RI and to pay fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months RI. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are as follows :- On 20.4.1986 at about 5.30 PM, PW.4 Baldev Singh lodged a written report Ex.P/3 with the Police Station Suratgarh stating inter-alia that on that day in the morning, he wen...
Satya Narayan Vs. Ram Prasan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-12-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2220; 2002(4)WLC451; 2002(4)WLN593
Garg, J. 1. This second appeal has been filed by the appellant-defendant against the judgment and decree dated 28.2.1983 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Bhilwara in Civil Appeal No. 40/80 (13/80) by which he dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-defendant and affirmed the judgment and decree dated 17.12.1979 passed by the learned Munsiff, Shahpura by which he decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 Ram Prasan for eviction of the original defendant Jagdish Prasad from the shop in question on the ground of reasonable and bonafide necessity under Section 13(1)(h) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1950').2. It arise's in the following circumstances:-One Ram Prasan (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff- respondent) filed a suit for eviction and arrears of rent against Jagdish Prasad (hereinafter referred to as the original defendant) in the Court of Munsiff. Shahpura District Bhilwara on 6.9...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Lal Bahadur Yadav
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-12-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLC404; 2002(4)WLN601
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed challening the award dated 28.2.2001 passed by the Labour Court by which the claim of the respondent workman has been allowed.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the respondent workman raised the industrial dispute and the appropriate Government, vide order dated 29.7.1997, made a reference as to whether the termination of the services of the respondent workman w.e.f. 1.6.1994 was in accordance with law and if not to what relief he was entitled. In pursuance of the said reference, the respondent workman filed a claim before the Labour Court to the effect that he had worked from 28.7.1993 to 31.5.1994 and his services had been terminated w.e.f. 1.6.1994 without complying with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The evidence was led before the Labour Court and after appreciating the said evidence it recorded the following findings of facts:(1) The workman had worked from 28.7.1993 to 31.5....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »