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.
Executive Director, Riico and anr. Vs. Judge, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR701]; (2006)IILLJ127Raj; RLW2006(1)Raj256; 2006(1)WLC359
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The instant special appeal impugns the order dated March 13th 2001 of the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition preferred by the petitioners was dismissed.2. The brief facts depict that the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in April, 1989 in regard to the legality and propriety of termination of service of respondent-workman Bhagwan Sahai who was employed on April 23rd, 1987 as Messenger and was removed from service in April, 1988 without the payment of retrenchment compensation.3. Undeniably, the workman had completed 240 days in service. The learned Labour Court had held that the order of termination was in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes, Act 1947 (for short, '1947 Act') and full benefits of continuance and back wages had been awarded. The learned Single Judge even though, confirmed the finding of retrenchment but reduced the backwages awarded to the respondent-workman.4. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that sin...
Rajasthan State Electricity Board (Now Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(Raj)286; [2006]281ITR274(Raj)
1. The following questions are raised as questions of law by the appellant in this appeal :(i) Whether the expression 'the date on which the refund is granted' in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 244A, as was applicable in the relevant assessment year, in the facts and circumstances of the case, need to be construed to be the date of service of the refund order and the Tribunal acted contrary to law in modifying the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ?(ii) Whether the belated despatch of refund order is against the legislative intendment as contemplated under Section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and entitles the assessee for interest on the refund amount under Section 244A and also on equitable consideration till the date of service of refund order ?2. The limited controversy in this appeal is whether the interest should be granted till the date of the despatch of the refund order or till the date when the order regarding payment of interest has been signed....
Smt. Huma HussaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(Raj)53
1. These two appeals are directed against the order of Tribunal dt. 1lth June, 2002 in the case of appellant for asst. yrs. 1993-94 and 1995-96.2. Appeal No. 83 of 2000 relates to the asst. yr. 1993-94 and appeal No. 81 of 2000 relates to the asst. yr. 1995-96. In these two appeals, following substantial questions have been framed respectively :Appeal No. 83 of 2002Whether, in the facts and circumstances, the addition of Rs. 1,76,400 in the assessment of assessee claimed to have been received from her father over a number of years and supported by materials placed by her on protective basis is not sustainable by rejecting such claim on conjectures and surmises without holding any enquiry into correctness of such materials.Appeal No. 81 of 2002(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, rejection of assessee's claim to having received gift of Rs. 20,000 from her father, who is a Lecturer, during the previous year relevant to assessment year is founded on conjectures and sur...
Smt. Huma HussaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: [2007]291ITR475(Raj)
1. These two appeals are directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated June 11, 2002, in the case of the appellant for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1995-96.2. Appeal No. 83 of 2002, relates to the assessment year 1993-94 and Appeal No. 81 of 2002 relates to the assessment year 1995-96. In these two appeals, the following substantial questions have been framed respectively:Appeal No. 83 of 2002:Whether, on the facts and circumstances, the addition of Rs. 1,76,400 in the assessment of the assessee claimed to have been received from her father over a number of years and supported by materials placed by her on protective basis is not sustainable by rejecting such claim on conjectures and surmises without holding any enquiry into correctness of such materials Appeal No. 81 of 2002:(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, rejection of the assessee's claim to having received gift of Rs. 20,000 from her father, who is a lecturer, during the previous ...
Hakumat Rai Vs. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj3013; 2006WLC(Raj)UC158
S.N. Jha, C.J. 1. This special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 4, 2005 dismissing the writ petition of the appellant. The appellant had filed the writ petition seeking direction upon the respondents to drop the departmental proceedings initiated against him during pendency of the criminal case. The facts of the case briefly are as follows:--2. During tenure of the appellant as Branch Manager of the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (in short 'the Insurance Company') at Kishangarh Branch, a criminal case bearing FIR No. RC/JAI/2003/A/0004 under Sections 120B, 409, 465, 467, 471 and 477A IPC and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) at Jaipur Branch against the appellant and others on March 7, 2003 and on November 15, 2003 charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant and others. The case is presently pending in the Court of Special Judge, CBI Cases,...
Sri Ram Through Lrs. Vs. Radhey Shyam and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj65; RLW2006(1)Raj432; 2006(1)WLC350
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. It is unfortunate that the present appeal which was filed in 1982 could not be decided expeditiously. Following substantial questions of law were framed at the time of admission of appeal:(i) Whether the courts below have misread and misconstrued Ex.A-3, Ex.A-4, Ex.A-5, Ex.A-10 and Ex.A-8 in holding that the present suit is not barred by resjudicata?(ii) Whether the finding of the courts below holding that the existence of Gali is based on no evidence?(iii) Whether the courts below have erroneously held that the opening of the spouts and shutters have rendered the alleged Nohra unusable and also affect the privacy of the plaintiffs' Nohra?2. Contextual fact depict that the plaintiff respondents (for short 'plaintiff') instituted civil suit for permanent injunction and possession in the court of Munsif. The plaintiff stated that in the year 1962 when the defendant appellant (for short, 'defendant') constructed his house on the eastern side i.e. towards the Nohra ...
Sant Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj890
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order 30.9.2005 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dholpur whereby he has rejected the application of the petitioner to release the truck involved in an offence under Section 8/15 N.D.P.S. Act.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 11.9.2005 at about 8.30 p.m. while Shri Rajesh Pathak, S.I.S.H.O., Police Station Maina, District Dholpur, was on a patrolling duty at around 11.00 p.m. a truck bearing No. HR-38B-7875 was seen coming from Dholpur. When the truck was stopped some men and women found sitting at the back of the truck fled. When the truck was searched nothing was found in the truck. However, the police became suspicious about the truck. Some bags carried by the petitioners were found in the truck in which some poppy husk in a small quantity was discovered. Since, the persons carrying poppy husk were not carrying any licence, therefore, they committed an offence under Section 8/15 N.D.P.S. Act. Consequently, the truck w...
Shanti Lal and anr. Vs. Kanhaiya Lal Alias Krishna Chandra and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-09-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj126
ORDERGovind Mathur, J.1. By this petition for writ validity and propriety of the order dated 21-11-2003 passed by learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Udaipur is questioned. The circumstances giving rise to present petition are as follows:The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit against one Smt. Bhuribai widow of Shri Bhawanishankar Ameta seeking a decree for partition of the alleged joint property claiming himself to be adopted son of Shri Bhawanishankar. Smt. Bhuribai denied the plaintiffs claim with a specific assertion that Shri Bhawanishankar never adopted the plaintiff as his son. Smt. Bhuribai before her death on 2-11-1991 sold the property in question to present petitioners by a registered sale deed dated 12-9-1989, consequently the petitioners became party to the suit and are now the defendants.2-3. By an order dated 14-7-1999 learned trial Court rejected an application preferred by defendant-petitioners under Order 13, Rule 2, CPC with a prayer to take on record a photostat ...
Gulab Singh and anr. Vs. Shiv Prasad and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-08-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj891
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. The claimant has filed this appeal for the enhancement of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer (Tribunal) vide award dated 18.12.2000 in M.A.C.T. Case No. 381/1999 (50/1994).2. Claimants are father and minor brother of deceased Vijay Singh aged 16 years, who was student of Class Xth, On 14.5.1993 at 6.45 a.m., while deceased was going to Ajmer by travelling in offending Bus No. RSE-375 being driven rashly and negligently by its driver (respondent No. 1) with a high speed in a zigzag manner, when reached near Birma Rawat's agricultural farm, the bus got uncontrolled, thereby overturned Railway Fatak, causing multiple injuries to bus passengers including deceased, who succumbed to injuries while taking him to hospital and died. Rs. 7,72,300/-were claimed as compensation under different heads, as per claim petition.3. After taking into consideration evidence led by either parties on record, the Tribunal recorded in finding that the deceased sust...
NitIn Spinners Limited Vs. Cestat
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-08-2005
Reported in: 2006(198)ELT490(Raj)
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the order of Customs, Excise and service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dtd. 30-10-2003. The appellant is 100% export oriented unit engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn and polyester yarn falling under Chapter 52 and 55 respectively of the schedule-I of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It has brought in the factory aluminum sheets and fiber glass for the purpose of its use and has actually been used in laying false ceiling and humidification plant.2. According to the assessee, it has used fiber glass and aluminum sheets for providing false ceiling in humidification plant to obtain better efficiency of the plant. He, therefore, procured the aforesaid goods without payment of Duty relying on the notification No. 1/95 C.E., dated 4-1-1995 by issuing CT-3 certificate.3. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise issued show cause notices dtd. 5-9-2001 calling upon the assessee to show cause against the proposed levy of Excise Duty on th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »