Rajasthan Court February 2001 Judgments
Priti Vs. Chairman, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ289
J.C. Verma, J.1. The present misc. appeal has been filed by Priti against the defendants challenging the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bharatpur in M.A.C. No. 51 of 1992 dated 7.9.94 whereby the award of Rs. 99,000 had been granted. Appeal has been filed for enhancement.2. The facts as stated are that due to rash and negligent driving of bus No. UP 80-9094 driven by respondent No. 2 Kanhaiya Lal belonging to respondent No. 1 on 1.3.92, the claimant was hit. The claimant had sustained injuries on head and both hands and due to excessive bleeding, it is stated that she had become unconscious and her both legs were crushed and fractured. She was taken to the General Hospital, Bharatpur and again referred to SMS Hospital, Jaipur, but because of the reason that hospital at Agra was near as compared to Jaipur, she was admitted to the hospital in Agra. She became permanently disabled in one leg. The necessary issues were framed. It was found by the Tribunal that the driver of ...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nidhi Toshniwal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ761; 2001(4)WLC183
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Questioning the findings dated 27.4.2000 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Beawar, the appellant insurance company canvassed that as the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid driving licence, the appellant insurance company ought to have been absolved from liability by the learned Tribunal in respect of the claim for compensation.2. Contextual facts depict that on account of accident caused by Bija Ram, the driver of jeep No. RJ 22-0738 on 9.7.1996, claimant-respondent Nidhi Toshniwal sustained fractures on both of her legs and left hand. She instituted claim petition against Bija Ram, the driver, Nazma, the vehicle owner and United India Insurance Co. Ltd., the appellant. Bija Ram and Nazma did not appear before the Tribunal and proceeded exparte. The appellant insurance company submitted written statement. As many as five issues were framed. On behalf of the claimant Laxmi Narain PW 1 was examined whereas the appellant insurance company produc...
Tag this Judgment!Amilal Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)WLC493; 2001(4)WLN640
J.C. Verma, J.1. If any example of exploitation of workers/employees of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation is to be looked into, this is one of the case where the petitioner employee Amilal admittedly is being paid daily wages for driving the bus of Roadways right from October, 1985. Though initially he was appointed on temporary basis for a month or so and posted at Kotputli as per annexure-1, but it is not denied that the petitioner is working continuously as Driver of Raodway Corporation ever since. After seven years of his service as stated in amended writ petition, he was even asked to undertake a trade test and interview for his regular selection by the Selection Board, before which selection board he had appeared as per annexure-2 and vide annexure-3. He was again informed in September, 1992 that he has been selected as Daily wager driver on which post he was working since 1985. He was asked to undergo medical test to be conducted by the Health Officer as to enable the d...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kumar Dhanuka Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: (2001)167CTR(Raj)398
By the CourtThis is an appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as under :On 16-1-1997, search and seizure operations were carried out by the officers of the Income Tax Department at the business premises of M/s H.P. Dhanuka Plastic Chem. Pvt. Ltd., M.I. Road, Jaipur, and the residential premises of Plot No. 361, Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur, as also at the residential premises of Shri Prem Kumar Gupta, an associate of the appellant, various documents and valuables in the form of cash, foreign exchange, silver and gold jewellery were found and seized during the search operations. As a result of search and seizure, the tax liability of Rs. 3.42 crores was raised vide assessment order, dated 29-1-1999. This was an ex parte assessment under section 144 of the Act computing the total undisclosed income of Rs. 4,25,66,587. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Commiss...
Tag this Judgment!ishwar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001WLC(Raj)UC384; 2001(1)WLN550
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 31.5.2000 (Annx. 2), by which the revision filed by the respondent has been allowed by the Additional District, Judge Chittorgarh.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the contesting respondent No. 4 filed a revision before respondent No. 2 that vide order dated 20.2.1988, the land has been allotted to the present petitioner without following the procedure required under the law. The Revisional Authority issued notice to the other parties and after hearing them, the revision has been allowed. Hence this petition.3. Learned Revisional Authority recorded the following findings of facts.(i) The original record of the Gram Panchayat was summoned. There was nothing on record to show that any proceeding in respect of the land in dispute had ever took place on 20.9.1987.(ii) No inquiry had been conducted prior to the allotment;(iii) The land could have been allotted without ...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ajay Vijay Traders
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: [2002]254ITR642(Raj); 2001(2)WLN332
1. The appellant-Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle Jodhpur, has filed this income-tax appeal against the order dated November 9, 1998, received on December 9, 1998, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, in Income-tax Appeal No. 586/JP of 1992 for the assessment year 1997-98. This appeal was initially placed for admission before the Division Bench consisting of Shri Shivaraj V. Patil (Chief Justice) and Justice Bhagwati Prasad. After hearing learned counsel, Shri Sandeep Bhandawat, for the appellant, this appeal was dismissed by a brief reasoned order because according to their Lordships no substantial question of law was arising in appeal for consideration and on the admitted facts the Tribunal did not find any merit in the appeal filed by the Revenue with the observation that though the learned Tribunal has not specifically referred to a proviso to Section 161(1A), it applied the law correctly to the admitted facts of the case and decided the matter.2. The af...
Tag this Judgment!J.K. Synthetics Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Rajasthan and Another
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)WLC187; 2001(3)WLN295
ORDERBalia, J.(1). Heard learned counsel for the parties.(2). By this writ petition, the petitioner-J.K. Synthetics Limited, a Company registered under the Companies Act and engaged in the activities of manufacturing cement at Nimbahera, challenges letters of demand dated 30th October, 1989 (Annex. 5), 6th November, 1989 (Annex. 7), dated 29th November 1989 (Annex. 9), dated 16th December, 1989 (Annex. 3), dated 29Ih December, 1989 (Annex. 12) and dated 12th January, 1990 (Annex. 14), by the Municipal Board, Nimbahera Respondent No.2, in respect of demands raised regarding octroi on goods brought by the Company within the Municipal limits between 20th July, 1989 to 18th October, 1989. The other reliefs claimed in the writ petition relating to declaration of the order of this Court passed in Special Appeal No. 84/87 on 13.9.89 in an appeal preferred by the present petitioner on earlier occasion to be still effective and operative in respect thereof notwithstanding promulgation of the Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Bahadur Nath Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)WLC289; 2007(3)WLN37
N.P. Gupta, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 24.10.2000 (Annx. 4), by which an enquiry under the provisions of Section 39(1)(a) read with Section 19(1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter called 'the Act, 1994') has been ordered; and also for quashing any action or order passed in pursuance thereof.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner had contested the Gram Panchayat election held on 4.2.2000 and was elected as Sarpanch of village Likhmadesar, Tehsil Sri Dungargarh, district Churu. One Mukun Nath, who had lost the election against the petitioner, filed an election petition on 28.2.2000, Inter alia, on the ground that the petitioner had more than two children and as the third child was born on 10.2.1999, i.e. after 27.11.1995, he was disqualified to contest the election Under Clause (1) of Section 19 of the Act, 1994. The said election petition No. 7/2000 (Annex. 1) is still pend...
Tag this Judgment!Ku. Indrakanta Saraswat Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)WLC589; 2001(4)WLN350
J.C. Verma, J.1. The father of petitioner Kamal Kishore Saraswat, and employee of Municipal Council, Ajmer, was working as Nakedar. He retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.7.1981 (ann. 1), whose pension and gratuity is being claimed in the present writ petition. For the convenience late Mr. Kamal Kishore Saraswat shall be referred to as 'Mr. Saraswat.'2. Mr. Saraswat was involved in Anti Corruption case, but before the case could be initiated Mr. Saraswat died on 11.3.1982 and the proceedings before the Anti Corruption Department were dropped vide order dated 3.6.1982 (Ann.2). At the time of superannuation, Mr. Saraswat had requested the department to grant him the pension and gratuity. On death of Mr. Saraswat his wife Smt. Sushila Devi continued to make request to the department for release of retiral benefits, pension and gratuity, but without any result. His wife had also died on 7.12.1982. The present writ petition has been filed by the daughter Indra Kanta Saraswa...
Tag this Judgment!C.i.T. Jodhpur Vs. M/S. Metalising Equipment Co. (P) Ltd., Jodhpur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)WLC318; 2001(2)WLN528
ORDERBalia, J.(1). Heard learned counsel for the parties.(2). This is an application under Sec. 25G(2) of the Income Tax Act 1961 at the instance of Commissioner of Income Tax, Jodhpur requiring the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to slate the case and refer the two questions of law said to be arising out of order of the Tribunal in l.T.A. No. 262/JP/92 to this Court for-its opinion. The questions of law proposed are as under:'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in law in upholding the decision of the learned CIT (A), directing the AO to allow deduction under Sec. 32AB? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of (he case the Hon'ble ITAT was legally justified in holding that the issue of claim under Sec. 32AB of the Act is debatable even though the provisions of section 32A(80) and 32AB(10) of the Act are very clear and these provisions have been further clarified by Circular No. 559 dated 4.5.90 of the CBDT'? (3). The Trib...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »