Rajasthan Court September 2004 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.
Harbir Kaur (Smt.) Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj836; 2004(4)WLC685
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Is the claim of the petitioner for medical reimbursement valid and justified in the facts and circumstances of this case, is the core question which emerges for consideration in the instant writ petition.2. The petitioner's husband late Shri Jagpal Singh, was the member of the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service (in short Higher Judicial Service). When he was holding the post of President District Consumer Redressal Forum, Dausa in the year 2000 he suspected to be a severe heart patient. He was examined by the Expert Cardiology of SMS Hospital, who advised him to undergo heart surgery. His case was referred to a Medical Board for examining the feasibility and place of heart surgery, which submitted its report on May 26, 2000. It was inter alia stated in the report that Jagpal Singh is suffering from Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (for short CABG) and his three vessels require grafting, therefore he needed CABG operation. It was further recommended that although t...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Rajasthan Spg. and Wvg. Mills Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Raj)96; [2006]281ITR408(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.2. Though three questions have been suggested as substantial questions of law arising from the order of Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, dt. 14th Oct., 2003, the appeal relates to deduction of one single item by way of amount laid wholly and exclusively for the purpose of assessee's business. Assessee has donated a bus valuing Rs. 5,12,000 to Vivekanand Kendriya Vidhyalaya, Hurda, where the children of employees of the assessee-company are receiving education. The amount spent for purchasing the bus had been debited to the Workman and Staff Welfare Account and it was claimed as expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of assessee's business as deduction under Section 37(1) of the IT Act, 1961 as a revenue expenditure.The AO was of the view that since the school is not owned by the company nor it runs under direct control of the assessee-company, and the entry is also not restricted to the wards of workmen and s...
Ram Deo Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj765; 2004(4)WLC579
Anil Dev Singh, C.J.1. This appeal arises in the following circumstances:-2. The appellant was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Singhrawat, Panchayat Samiti Dhod, District Sikar. Some of the members moved a motion expressing want of confidence in the appellant. On January 29, 2003 the third respondent, the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sikar, convened a meeting of the Gram Panchayat for consideration of the no-confidence motion on February 10, 2003. On Februarys, 2003 the State Election Commission declared February 16, 2003 as the date for by- elections for the two vacant seats of the Gram Panchayat Singhrawat. The appellant feeling aggrieved by the order of the third respondent dated January 29, 2003, filed a writ petition mainly on the ground that since the by-elections were to be held on February 13, 2003 the fixation of date for consideration of the no-confidence motion before February 16, 2003 was an arbitrary act on the part of the third respondent. The learned sin...
ibrahim @ Panna Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj887; 2004(4)WLC570
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The petitioner, who is confined in Central Jail Jaipur seeks release on second parole under Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (for short 'Parole Rules'). Since no reply has been filed by the respondents despite several opportunities, we proceed to decide the petition on the basis of material on record.2. The petitioner, who was convicted and sentenced under Section 302 IPC on July 31, 1997, was released on first parole by the District Parole Committee. The application of the petitioner for releasing him on second parole has been dismissed on June 30, 2004 by the Parole Committee on the ground that police report was adverse against him.3. In the matters where the High Court is in seizin of the appeals of the prisoners, following directions have been issued in writ petition No. 5000/2004 on September 14, 2004:-(i) It shall be the duty of Superintendent Jail to make an endorsement about the details of pendency of the criminal appeal, b...
Balmukund Arora (Since Deceased) Through Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajas ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Raj228; RLW2005(1)Raj221; 2005(1)WLC73
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This restoration application has been filed by the petitioner-applicant Om Prakash, who is son of Ram Chandra, in capacity as LR of deceased Balmukund on 29.6.2004 with the prayer the writ petition being No. 4674/1989, which was dismissed vide order dated 25.9.1996 in compliance of the order of this Court dated 2.9.1996, be restored to its original number.2. It arises in the following circumstances:The deceased Balmukund filed a writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4674/1989 against the respondents and when that writ petition was pending before this Court, the sole petitioner (deceased Balmukund) died on 22.3.1996 and thereafter, on 2.7.1996, an application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC read with Section 151 CPC and Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed by the present applicant-petitioner Om Prakash with the prayer that his name be substituted in place of deceased Balmukund as, according to Will executed by deceased Balmukund, he was his LR.T...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shiv Ratan Soni
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)194CTR(Raj)126; [2005]279ITR261(Raj)
ORDERRajesh Balia, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, dt. 26th May, 2003 relating to asst. yr. 1988-89 deciding ITA No. 1111/Jp/1994 and ITA No. 898/Jp/1995 filed by the respondent-assessee before the Tribunal. There were cross-appeals filed by the assessee to the extent they were aggrieved with the order passed by the CIT(A) in an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of reassessment for the asst. yr. 1988-89 dt. 30th Nov., 1993.2. The appeal of the assessee was allowed and that of the Revenue was dismissed by the Tribunal on threefold grounds. Firstly, that prior to amendment of Section 147 w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, it was required under Section 148 that the AO gives to the assessee a notice for filing return of not less than 30 days whereas after the amendment, it was required that the assessee should be given a notice to file return within 30 days. The Tribunal found distinction between the expression 'within 30 days' and...
Madanchand and Brothers and anr. Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj648; 2005(1)WLC668
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.2. By this revision petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 12th April, 2004 by which the appellate court allowed the appeal of the plaintiff respondent bank and set aside the dismissal of the suit, which was dismissed in default.3. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff's suit was dismissed in default as nobody appeared before the Trial Court on 6th March, 1995. The plaintiff bank submitted an application under Rule 9 Order 9 C.P.C. stating therein that on that day, the advocates were on strike and the plaintiff had no knowledge about the date of the suit. The suit was fixed for framing issues only and the plaintiff's presence was not at all necessary as the court could have framed the issues and could have proceeded with the suit, therefore, the suit should not have been dismissed by the court below. It is further prayed that since the matter is relating to the recovery of the bank money and in case,...
Sanatan Goswami Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1076; RLW2005(1)Raj66; 2004(4)WLC561
R.P. Vyas, J.1. The instant petition has been filed by petitioner - Sanatan Goswamy, praying that the respondents may be directed to immediately release the petitioner prematurely under the provisions of the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1958'). It has further been prayed that the respondents may be directed to convene the meeting of the Advisory Board and place the case of the petitioner before the said Board. It has also been prayed that any other order, which is deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case, may be passed in favour of the petitioner to immediately release him prematurely.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are that on 15th July, 1985, the petitioner was involved in a criminal case for the offence Under Section 326/34, IPC, and he was sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment by the District & Sessions Judge,Jaipur.3. Aggrieved by the said judgment of the learned District & Se...
Shiv Shanker Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj212; 2005(1)WLC189
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 3.1.2003 with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 3.12.2002 (Annex.6) passed by the respondent No. 2 Addl. District Magistrate (City), Bikaner by which the earlier order dated 30.8.1983 (Annex. 1), by which the petitioner was given certificate declaring him to be a member of Scheduled Caste category (santia (sadh), was cancelled and further, another order dated 12.12.2002 (Annex.8) passed by the respondent No. 3 Secretary, Rajasthan Housing Board, Jaipur by which the petitioner was put under suspension, be quashed and set aside and the petitioner be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits.(2). The case of the petitioner as put forward by him in this writ petition is as follows:-The petitioner submitted an application alongwith affidavit and necessary documents before the City Magistrate...
Vikram Singh Chauhan Vs. the Marwar GramIn Bank
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-14-2004
Reported in: RLW2005(1)Raj208; 2004(4)WLC720
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 5.3.2003 against the respondent with a prayer that the respondent be directed to consider the case of the petitioner to give appointment to him on compassionate ground on the post of clerk or any other post.2. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under:i) That father of the petitioner late Shri Balwant Singh died on 25.9.1998 and at the time of death, deceased was in service of respondent - Bank and he was regular employee of the bank since 1979 and when he died, he was working on the post of Branch Manager at Marwar Gramin Bank, Harji Branch.ii) It was further submitted by the petitioner that he is graduate and is fully qualified for appointment in the respondent - Bank on compassionate ground.iii) Further case of the petitioner is that after death of his father, he submitted an application dtd. 5.10.1998 (Annex.1) for seeking appointment...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »