Rajasthan Court July 2003 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.
Ratan Lal and anr. Vs. S.B.B.J. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj306; 2003(4)WLC242
Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Perused the impugned order dated 4th March, 1995 against which the petitioner preferred this revision petition.3. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff- respondent No. 1 Bank obtained a decree for Rs. 72,079/- on 16th Dec., 1978. The execution petition was filed for recovery of the said amount by sale of the mortgaged property by the decree holder non-petitioner No. 1. In the execution petition, the judgment-debtor submitted an application raising objection that since, the property mortgaged is an agriculture land, therefore, it cannot be put to auction and there is bar against the attachment and sale of the agriculture land.4. The Executing Court observed that there is no provision in the CPC, which puts bar against attachment and sale of agriculture land. Special provisions for sale of agriculture produce has been given in Order 21 Rules 74 & 75 CPC. It is also held that after coming into force of the Rajasthan Agricul...
Kevji Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj233; 2003(4)WLC540
Mathur, J. 1. Instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25.07.2001 passed by the Sessions Judge, Udaipur convicting the appellant of offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment further undergone simple imprisonment of three months.2. The appellant Kevji stood trial for the charge of the murder of one Naru along with two lady accused namely Smt. Bhulki and Smt. Meera, The prosecution case as projected during the trial is that on receiving a telephonic message about the death of a person, police reached to the hospital at Dhariawad and recorded the statement Ex. P-1 of PW-1 Narayan. He stated inter alia that on the preceding clay at about 7:00 PM the appellant Kevji armed with kulhari and two other accused Smt. Bhulki and Smt. Meera (since acquitted) armed with lathies mounted attack on his father Naru on the way near his house, Kevji gave a kulhari blow on the head of his father. After he had...
Rajendra Swami Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj902; 2003(4)WLC164
Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 18.12.2001 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned seniority list dtd. 12.11.2001 (Annex. 8) issued by the State Government be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to prepare fresh seniority list by reckoning entire service of the petitioner i.e. service from the first appointment i.e. 2.7.83.2. It arises in the following circumstances:i) The petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Engineer in the Municipal Board, Sangaria vide order dtd. 30.6.83 (Annex. 1) passed by the Chairman, Municipal Board, Sangaria and after completion of probation period, the petitioner was made permanent by order dtd. 16.11.90 (Annex. 2) with effect from the date he completed his probation period i.e. 2.7.85.ii) Thereafter the petitioner submitted a representation citing the similar cases wherein the persons on complet...
Satish and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
Reported in: 2003WLC(Raj)UC652; 2003(3)WLN614
A.C. Goyal, J.1. This revision by both the accused persons is filed under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short the 'Act of 2000'), against the order dated 9.6.2003, whereby learned Sessions Judge, Bharatpur, affirmed the order dated 29.5.2003, by which the Juvenile Justice Board, Bharatpur dismissed the bail application submitted under Section 12 of the Act, 2000.2. Both the accused persons below 18 years of age are facing trial for offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and under Section 3 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. According to the prosecution case at about 10 a.m. on 7.3.2003 both the accused persons inflicted injuries to Dinesh resulting into his death. Both the Courts below dismissed the bail application on the ground that their release on the bail would defeat the ends of justice.3. Learned counsel submitted that there was no ground to make this observation and otherwise both the accused were enti...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Inder Jeet Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-09-2003
Reported in: (2003)185CTR(Raj)459; [2005]272ITR555(Raj)
1. In this petition, under Section 64(1) of the ED Act, 1953, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for our opinion :Question in RA No. 13/Jp/84 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the estate left by the deceased belonged to the HUF and only value of 1/4th share therein is assessable to estate duty in the hands of the Accountable Person. Question in RA No. 14/Jp/84 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the following assets left by the deceased were not his personal assets : Rs.1. Cash in hand 3,6762. Money in bank 24,0363. Amount due in insurance policies 1,28,296' 2. On the death of H.H. Maharaja Rana Harish Chandra, Accountable Person--Inder Jeet Singh has submitted the return and claimed HUF status of the property left by H.H. Maharaja Rana Harish Chandra of Jhalawar and claimed that only 1/4th share of the property of HUF is liable to the. es...
Savitri Devi (Smt.) Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-09-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj330; 2003(4)WLC266
Parihar, J.1. The petitioner applied for the post of Teacher Gr.III in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the respondents in the year 1998. As per circular, issued by the State Government in regard to the above selections, 10 bonus marks were provided for residents of the District, for which the selections were to be made, and further 5 bonus marks were provided for the residents of rural area of the District. Providing benefit of bonus marks, as referred above, came to be challenged by some of the candidates by way of filing writ petitions before this court.2. In view of different views, expressed by some of the Benches, the matter came to be referred to the Larger Bench of this court. The Larger Bench decided the controversy in favour of the petitioners, who had challenged the validity of providing bonus marks on the basis of residency, as referred above. The controversy ultimately came to be raised before the Supreme Court in the SLP.S, filed by the following categories of per...
Prakash Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-09-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj992; 2003(4)WLC301
Ashok Parihar, J.1. The petitioner applied for the post of Teacher Gr.III in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the respondents in the year 1998. As per circular, issued by the State Government in regard to the above selections, 10 bonus marks were provided for residents of the District, for which the selections were to be made, and further 5 bonus marks were provided for the residents of rural area of the District. Providing benefit of bonus marks, as referred above, came to be challenged by some of the candidates by way of filing writ petitions before this court.2. In view of different views, expressed by some of the Benches, the matter came to be referred to the Larger Bench of this court. The Larger Bench decided the controversy in favour of the petitioners, who had challenged the validity of providing bonus marks on the basis of residency, as referred above. The controversy ultimately came to be raised before the Supreme Court in the SLPs, filed by the following categories o...
Satya Kumar Joshi Vs. the Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-09-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1522; 2003(4)WLC268
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1.This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India against the respondents on 29/10/2001 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the order dtd. 25.9.2001 (Annex.4) passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Udaipur (respondent No. 1) by which the application (Annex.1) of the petitioner dtd. 29.11.2000 filed under Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1947) was rejected inter alia holding that since on two earlier occasions permission to be represented through a lawyer was accorded to the respondent No. 2 (employer) therefore, that permission would not be reviewed, be quashed and set aside.2. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under:i) That through order dtd. 30.3.2000, the State Government made a reference to the Industrial Tribunal, Udaipur (respondent No. 1).ii) That reference was registered by respondent No. 1 (Industr...
Babu Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-09-2003
Reported in: RLW2004(3)Raj1527; 2004(3)WLC173
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1.The appellants in this appeal were put up for trial before the Additional essions Judge Bayana District Bharatpur in Sessions Case No. 3/1998 for having committed murder of Sunil Kumar. Learned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment dated September 29, 2000 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under-(1) Babu Lal U/s. 302 IPC To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500A, in default to further suffer Ten Days Rigorous Imprisonment.(2) Ramswaroop (3) Neetu & (4) Ashok Kumar: U/S. 302/34 IPC To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer Ten Days Rigorous Imprisonment.2. Put briefly the prosecution case is that on August 23, 1997 at 8.45 PM informant Manohar Lal instituted written report (Ex.P- 1) with the Police Station Bayana alleging therein that at about 7.30 PM when he along with his sons Sunil Kumar, Mukesh Kumar, Yogesh Kumar and Mahesh Kumar s/o Gopi Chand were sitting in their shop, the appellants Ba...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Udaipur Mineral Development Syndicate ( ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Raj)384; [2004]269ITR263(Raj)
1. On an application under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for the opinion of this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claim of assessee of Rs. 54,607 in respect of depreciation, power charges, engine-hire, despite the fact that business remained closed during the relevant accounting year ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance of claim of expenditure of Rs. 1,51,190 incurred on medical treatment of Shri R.K. Golecha, M.D. in USA, despite the fact that the expenditure was in the nature of 'Personal expenditure' of Shri Golecha ?'2. The assessee-company is engaged in the business of mining of gypsum. The relevant assessment year is 1984-85. During the course of assessment, the AO, noticed that assessee has claimed depreciation, power charges and engine-hire charges and also clai...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »