Rajasthan Court November 2005 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.
Acto Vs. Juharmal Badri Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj957; (2007)5VST276(Raj); 2006(2)WLC350
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of Tax Board dt.3.8.2004 rejecting the Revenue's Appeal No. 202/2003/Dungarpur CTO Dungarpur v. Juharmal Badri Lal, Devli, by which the Tax Board upholding the order of learned D.C. (Appeals) held that no penalty under Section 78 of the Act was liable to be imposed on the respondent-assessee.2. The Assessing authority - learned CTO, Anti Evasion, Dungarpur imposed a penalty of Rs. 23,618/- @ 30% of the value of the goods of Rs. 78,725/- under Section 78(5) of the Act on the ground that the goods in question namely 100 bags of wheat being carried by Truck No.GJ-9T/8473 on 22.11.2001 and along with the said transit, two sale bills, one bearing No. 943 dated 21.11.2001 for Rs. 78,725/- for 100 bags of wheat of the respondent-assessee to M/s. Ambika Fine Food Rader, Gujarat was found and also another Bill bearing hand written No. 940 of the same date in favour of the same party, of the same amount and same quantity o...
Om Prakash Meshwari and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj348; 2006(1)WLC324
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The writ petition was filed by the appellant seeking quashing of the orders dated August 22, 1988 Annex.6 and January 11, 1991 Annex.8. In the order dated August 22, 1988 learned District Judge, Sawai Madhopur proceeded ex parte and held that land in question left by Smt. Soni died without any heir ought to have been declared as State land. When the appellants came to know about ex parte order, they submitted an application on July 17, 1989 for setting aside the said order. Learned District Judge vide order dated January 11, 1991 dismissed the application on the ground that there was no proceedings. The appellants challenged the order of learned District Judge by filing writ petition that was dismissed on September 30, 1996. Against this order of learned Single Judge that the instant special appeal has been filed2. It appears that learned Single judge misread the Hindi word 'RAJGAM Escheat as 'RAJINAMA' Compromise and observed in the impugned order thus:The peti...
Ram Kishan Gurjar Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj287; 2006(1)WLC319
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant was appointed on muster roll by the respondent on July 16,1986 on the post of cattle guard in Forest department. He was removed from service without compliance of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'ID Act'). He raised industrial dispute before the Labour Court Kota. The respondents did not produce any evidence or any affidavit controverting the facts submitted by the appellant. Learned Labour Court vide Award dated May 23,1996 while adding 44 days of weekly and other holidays into the actual 201 working days held that since the compliance of Section 25F of ID Act was necessary, the order of removal of appellant with full back wages with continuity of service was also issued. The Award dated May 23,1996 was challenged by the respondents by filing the writ petition, which came to be allowed vide order dated October 11, 2001 on the ground that since the workman had not worked on those holidays the same could not be counted in...
Bhagwan Sahai and ors. Vs. Suresh Chand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj249; 2006(1)WLC328
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Having heard the submissions advanced before me, I find that no substantial questions of law arise in the instant second appeal.2. Contextual facts depict that the suit was instituted by the plaintiffs seeking eviction of defendants from the suit premises on the ground of personal bonafide necessity, substantial damages, nuisance and subletting. The learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Jaipur City (West) dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated December 6, 1999. The plaintiffs preferred first appeal in the Court of District Judge Jaipur City, which was transferred to the court of learned Additional District Judge No. 2 Jaipur City, who decreed the suit of the plaintiffs on the ground of personal and bonafide necessity only and reversed the findings of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Jaipur City (west) to that extent. In the instant second appeal the defendants seek to quash the judgment and decree dated March 3, 2001 of the learned Additional Dis...
Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. Hemendra Industries
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: [2006]147STC351(Raj)
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This revision petition under Section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 is directed against the order dated January 25, 2003 of the Rajasthan Tax Board dismissing the Revenue appeal and holding that if the part of manufacturing process of polishing of slabs and tiles of granite is undertaken by the assessee-unit outside the factory premises on job basis from some other industrial unit then, it cannot be said that the assessee unit is not entitled to the benefit of the exemption from the sales tax under the Incentive Scheme, 1987.2. Learned assessing authority found for the year in question 1990-91 that in the job charges account, the assessee had spent a sum of Rs. 43,100 as payment towards job charges paid to the other industrial units which constituted 6.6 per cent of the value of the total production of the industrial unit and 23.37 per cent of the total cost of raw materials used by the assessee in question. According to the assessing authority, the indust...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Madan Lal Sharma and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC529
ORDERK.S. Rathore, J.1. The present controversy is fully covered by judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Baljit Kaur and Ors. reported in : AIR2004SC1340 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the insurer to satisfy the awarded amount and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle simply by initiating a proceeding before the Executing Court without filing a separate suit. The same view has been taken by the Division Bench of this Court while considering the judgment in the case of National Insurance Co. v. Kamla and Ors. reported in : [2001]2SCR797 and held that the appellant Assurance Company will be entitled to recover the awarded amount from the owner/driver.2. In view of the ratio decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court, the appellant-Insurance Company is entitled to recover the amount of award from the owner of the vehicle by initiating the proceedings before the Executing Court in the same proceedings. The amount awarded...
Omwati and ors. Vs. Sita Ram Mall and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC537
ORDERK.S. Rathore, J.1. The appellants have challenged the Impugned award dated 9.10.2001 passed by the MACT, Deeg, Bharatpur only to the extent whereby the Tribunal has computed the award after deducting 1/3rd income of the deceased on account of his personal expenses.2. Learned Counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the judgment rendered in case of Kamlesh and Ors. v. RSRTC and Ors. reported in IV (2005) ACC 269 : 2005 (5) RDD 1340, wherein this Court has held that such deduction is not admissible on taking notional income of deceased under Second Schedule of the Act.3. In view of the ratio decided by this Court, I deem it proper to direct the MACT, Deeg to compute the award without deducting 1/3rd income of the deceased on account of his personal expenses. After fresh computation of award, the difference of amount shall be deposited by the Insurance Company before the MACT, Sawai Madhopur and the MACT, Sawai Madhopur is directed to deposit the said amount in MIS Scheme (Post ...
Omwati and ors. Vs. Sita Ram Mal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: 2007ACJ701
K.S. Rathore, J.1. The appellants have challenged the impugned judgment dated 9.10.2001 passed by the M.A.C.T., Deeg, Bharatpur only to the extent whereby the Tribunal has computed the award after deducting one-third income of the deceased on account of his personal expenses.2. Learned Counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the judgment rendered in the case of Kamlesh v. Rajasthan State Road Trans. Corporation , wherein this Court has held that such deduction is not admissible on taking notional income of deceased under Second Schedule of the Act.3. In view of the ratio decided by this Court, I deem it proper to direct M.A.C.T., Deeg, Bharatpur, to compute the award without deducting one-third income of the deceased on account of his personal expenses. After fresh computation of award, the difference of amount shall be deposited by the insurance company before M.A.C.T., Sawai Madhopur and the M.A.C.T., Sawai Madhopur is directed to deposit the said amount in monthly income schem...
Phool Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj122; 2006WLC(Raj)UC141
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. Instant petition has been filed seeking promotion on the post of Physical Education Teacher Gr. II on premises that one Tara Sain, who was appointed as Physical Education Teacher on 10.08.79, is junior to him and accordingly, he is also entitled for promotion to the post in question from the date she was promoted.2. After selections were made by District Education Officer, Sikar, petitioner was posted as Physical Education Teacher on temporary basis by District Education Office (Female) in Govt. Girls Sr. School vide order dt. 28.12.77 (Ann.1).3. Name of one Tara Sain has been shown in a list of the cadre of Sr. Teacher Gr. III (Ann.5) prepared by Dy. DEO Sikar. Petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing Civil Writ Petition No. 4638/91 with the prayer that despite the fact that his junior Tara Sain has been promoted as Teacher Gr.II and without any reasons or justification, his candidature has not been considered. This Court vide order dt. 11.09.91 (Ann.6) at...
General Manager, Bank of Baroda and ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, Centra ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: (2006)IILLJ399Raj; RLW2006(1)Raj263; 2006(1)WLC330
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellants (for short, 'employer') filed writ petition in the Single Bench of this Court challenging the award dated February 11, 2000 of the learned Labour Court. Learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition vide order dated February 1, 2001. Against this order of learned Single Judge, the instant special appeal has been preferred by the employer.2. Contextual facts depict that the Reference was made by the appropriate Government to the Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur as to whether the termination of the services of the respondent-workman (for short, 'workman') vide order dated May 23,1994 was legal and justified and if not to what relief he was entitled for. Before the learned Labour Court, both the parties adduced evidence and it was found that the workman had joined the service on June 22, 1993 and he was asked orally on May 23, 1994 that his services stood terminated. Initially, the workman filed writ petition which was dismissed on July 8, 19...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »