Rajasthan Court August 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.
Saleem Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLN380
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant Saleem against the judgment and order dated 14.7.1987 passed by the learned Sessions Judge. Merta in Sessions Case No. 43/1984 whereby the learned Sessions Judge while acquitting the accused appellant for offence under Section ,304 I.P.C., convicted the accused appellant for offence under Section 323 I.P.C. and sentenced him as under:Name of Accused Convicted Sentence awarded under SectionSaleem 323 I.P.C. 1 Year's R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000 in default to further undergo 1 month's R.I.2. It arises in the following circumstances:(i) On 6.7.1984 P.W.8 Megha Ram lodged a report Ex.P/3 before Police Station, Makrana stating that his brother Dungra Ram (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was working labour job and he worked under the accused appellant and after some time he left the work of accused appellant Salim and started doing labour work in another mine. At about 10 a.m. his brother Dungra Ram went t...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Hemchand Golecha
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: [2002]254ITR70(Raj)
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Shri R. B. Mathur, learned counsel appearing for the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Bikaner, headquarters at Jaipur. The matter relates to eight Revenue appeals for the assessment years 1981-82 to 1988-89 arising out of the common order dated September 17,1993, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Rajasthan-III, Jaipur, holding that the assessment orders are invalid and ab initio void. Against the said order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)'), eight appeals were filed in Wealth-tax Appeals Nos. 310 to 317/JP of 1993 before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal'), which were also disposed of by the Tribunal by a consolidated order as a common issue was involved.2. The matter involved in these cases pertains to the assessment years 1981-82 to 1988-89. The facts of these appeals are that the Department on the basis of the information/material in the posses...
State of Raj. Vs. Mohan Singh and ors., Etc. Etc.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLN238
Rajesh Balia, J. 1. These nine (sic ten ?) appeals arise out of the proceedings which have a chequered history. All the respondents in these appeals claim to be admitted as tenants on the agricultural land situated in the erstwhile Jagir of Chhatargarh in the erstwhile State of Bikaner, now in the Bikaner district. The lands-fall within the area irrigated by the Rajasthan Canal (now known as Indira Gandhi Canal). The Jagir of Chhatargarh was resumed under the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952, on 23rd of August, 1954. It was the case of the respondents that they were regularly paying the rent to the erstwhile Jagirdars and, thereafter, they have paid the rent to the State Government. According to them, after the resumption of Chhatargarh Jagir, they became tenants of the State Government by operation of the provisions of Section 9 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1952') and consequently the Ra...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. M.A.C.T., Jaipur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Raj167
Keshote, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.Relying on the decisions of the Apex Court in cases of New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Sita Bai and Ors., 2000 (1) T.A.C. 3 (SC), New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Bhagwati Devi and Ors., 1999 (2) T.A.C. 441 (SC), National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jikubhai Nathuji Dabhi (Smt.) and Ors., (1997) 1 SCC 66, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sunita Rathi and Ors., 1998 (1) T.A.C. 697 (SC), learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Assurance Company in the claim petition filed by the claimants for the compensation for the death of their bread earner was not necessary party.2. It has next been contended that when the Company was riot necessary party, the Tribunal has committed a serious error of jurisdiction to order for payment of Rs. 50,000/- to the claimants Under Section 140 of the Motor-Vehicles Act, 1988 on the principle of no fault liability by the Company.3. I have given my thoughtful considerations to the submiss...
Commissioner of W.T., Bikaner Vs. Hemchand Golecha
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)WLC551
Lakshmanan, C.J. (1) Heard Shri R.B. Mathur, learned counsel appearing for the Commissioner, Wealth Tax, Bikaner, Headquarters at Jaipur. The matter relates to eight reveneue appeals for the assessment years 1981-82 to 1988-89 arising out of the common order dated 17th of September, 1993 passed by the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) Rajaslhan-III, Jaipur holding that the assessment orders are Invalid and ab initio void. Against the said order of the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)'), eight appeals were filed in Wealth Tax Appeal Nos. 310 to 31 7/JP/1993 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short the Tribunal') which were also disposed of by the Tribunal by a consolidate order as a common issue was involved.(2). The : matter involved in these cases pertains to the assessment years 1981-82 to 1988-89. ' The facts of these appeals are that the department on the basis of theinformation/material in possession of the...
The Oriental Insurance Company and ors. Vs. Gyan Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)WLC547
Lakshmanan, C.J. (1). Heard Mr. Tripurari Sharma, for the appellant, Mr. Sandeep Mathur, for respondents No. 1 to 8 and Shri K.N. Tiwari, for respondents No. 9 and 10. (2). In this case, due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle in question, the husband of the first respondent, Smt. Gyan Devi died in the accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 7,89,600/- as compensation together with the interest @ 12% from the date of filing of the petition till the date of payment. The award has been passed against the appellant - Insurance Company as well as the owner of the vehicle -- respondent No. 9 herein. The owner has not preferred any appeal against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the appellant --Insurance Company alone has preferred the appeal. (3). While admitting the present appeal, a Division Bench of this Court granted stay on the recovery of the compensation amount from the Insurance Company but reserved liberty to the claimants to re...
K.C. Bajaj Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)WLC556
Lakshmanan, C.J. (1). This appeal is directed against the judgment/order dated 11.11.98 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5540/98 filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. As the order under appeal is a short one. We reproduce the translated version of the said order as under:- 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner white challenging the order of R.C.S.A.T. Jaipur dated 8.6.98 has argued that seniority list cannot be issued in accordance with the judgment dated 3.10.96 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 14985/95 read with S.L.P. (C) No.21784/96 and the order passed by Tribunal is in conformity with the order passed by the Apex Court. I considered the arguments of the learned counsel in the light of order dated 8.6.98. Section 5 of the R.C.S.A.T. Act, 1976 (which will be referred to as Tribunal) is as follows:- '5 (1) subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, the tribunal shall follow such procedure as it may think.' A perusal of the ...
Hira Oil and Dal Mills Vs. Ito
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: (2001)72TTJ(NULL)683
ORDERP.M. Jagtap, AM.This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpur, dated 17-1-1994.2. The only issue arising out of this appeal relates to the addition of Rs. 95,300 made by assessing officer and confirmed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) on account of alleged unaccounted sale of old Bardana/gunny bags.3. We have heard the arguments of learned representatives of both the parties and also perused the relevant material on record.4. The learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessing officer neither pointed out any defects in the books of account maintained by the assessee nor specifically invoked the provisions of section 145 of the Act. He has, therefore, contended that the trading addition made in this case without rejecting the books of account and invoking the provisions of section 145 was not justified. In support of this contention he has cited Deputy CIT v. Mewar Textiles Mills Ltd. (1998) 64 TTJ (JP) 502, Vinod K...
Ladi Vs. Badri Narayan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: II(2001)DMC524
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant was married to respondent on May 20, 1984 according to the Customs of Meena (Scheduled Tribe) Community. The respondent (husband) instituted a suit for declaration in the Family Court No. 2, Jaipur against the appellant (wife) on June 18, 1998 seeking following relief'xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx''(This be declared that the parties got separated on May 6, 1995 according to the rites and customs of Meena Community and in front of the persons of the said community and from that day onwards they are no longer husband and wife).Learned Family Court vide its decree and judgment dated June 14, 2000 granted the relief sought by the respondent and decreed the suit. The appellant in the instant miscellaneous appeal seeks to quash the said decree and judgment of the Family Court.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Section 13 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short 1984 Act), provides that no party in a suit or proceeding b...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Gyan Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLN554
AR. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Mr. Tripurari Sharma, for the appellant, Mr. Sandeep Mathur, for respondents No. 1 to 8 and Shri K.N. Tiwari, for respondents No. 9 and 10.2. In this case, due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle in question, the husband of the first respondent, Smt. Gyan Devi died in the accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 7,89,600/- as compensation together with the interest @ 12% from the date of filing of the petition till the date of payment. The award has been passed against the appellant-Insurance Company as well as the owner of the vehicle-respondent No. 9 herein. The owner has not preferred any appeal against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the appellant-Insurance Company alone has preferred the appeal.3. While admitting the present appeal, a Division Bench of this Court granted stay on the recovery of the compensation amount from the Insurance Company, but reserved liberty to the claimants to recover the c...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »