Rajasthan Court July 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.
D.D. Shah and Brothers Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(Raj)1; [2006]283ITR486(Raj); 2004(3)WLC425
Rajesh Balia, J.1. In this special appeal, a short but interesting question that arises for consideration is whether the blending of different types of tea by the assessee amounts to production of a thing or an article by an industrial undertaking within the meaning of expression as used in Section 80IB of the IT Act, 1961, though it may not amount to manufacture of goods in the sense of bringing into existence altogether a new and different thing as known differently in the commercial parlance in the market where tea is transacted.2. The appellant-assesses has set up a small-scale industrial unit in the backward industrial area of Banswara. The appellant's case is that it purchased tea leaves powder/granules and these tea leaves are collected by marking the name of garden and lot number. The samples of available quality are dispatched to the 'Blend Master' who after going through his own process, suggests the mixing ratio and process of mixing for making the perfect blend of tea. The ...
Mansukh Bhai Industries Ltd. Vs. Shakti Agencies
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: IV(2006)BC51; [2006]133CompCas525(Raj); RLW2005(4)Raj2356; 2005(4)WLC220
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956 is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 5.9.2003 by which the Company Petition No. 24 of 2003, a winding-up petition under Section 439 read with Section 433(e) of the Act, was admitted by an exparte order and the petition was ordered to be advertised in accordance with the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959.2. The appellant-respondent company before the learned Single Judge which was sought to be wound up has preferred this appeal, inter alia on the ground that the learned Single Judge has committed a grave error in admitting the company petition straightway without a pre-admission notice to the company and directing the advertisement of the same in newspapers and this has caused serious prejudice to the respondent company.3. Shri Paras Kuhad, learned Counsel for the company has urged before us that the impugned exparte order of admission and advertisement of the winding up the company ...
Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2533; 2005(4)WLC205
V.K. Bali, J.1. Dinesh Kumar the sole appellant herein, as per prosecution case is said to have intentionally caused death of Karni Ram on 18.3.1999 at 08.00/08.15 a.m. First Information Report with regard to incident was lodged on the same day within an hour so at 09.00 a.m. by Karni Ram himself which was recorded by Pane Singh, I.O. who was examined as P.W. 13. Special Report with regard to incident reached to the concerned Magistrate on 18.3.1999 at 11.30 a.m. Karani Ram succumbed to the injuries received by him on 30.3.1999. The appellant after trial has since been held guilty for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment as also to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment vide order dated 24.7.2001 recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Sikar. It is against this order that the present appeal has been filed.2. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined Dr....
Gopa Ram Vs. State of Raj. and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2647; 2005(4)WLC278
Govind Mathur, J.1. By this petition for writ a challenge is given by the petitioner to the order dated 16.4.1991 passed by Superintendent of Police, Pali discharging the petitioner from service being found his services unsatisfactory during probation.2. The facts in brief giving rise to present petition are as follows:By an order dated 18.9.1989 passed by Superintendent of Police, Pali appointment was given to the petitioner to the post of Constable in Rajasthan Police on being selected by a competent selection board constituted under Rajasthan Civil Services Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1989'. The appointment of the petitioner was placed on probation for a period of two years in accordance with Rule 37 of the Rules of 1989.After successful completion of training at Police Training Centre, Kishangarh the petitioner was posted at police lines, Pali by an order dated 10.12.1990. The Superintendent of Police, Pali by order impugned dated...
Kanti Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2823; 2005(4)WLC408
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. The plaintiff have preferred this intra-court appeal against the judgment dated 21.11.1990 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil First Appeal No. 31/1988, whereby the learned Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiffs and maintained the judgment and decree dated 22.12.1987 passed by the District Judge, Sirohi in Civil Suit No. 22/1971, whereby, the suit filed by the plaintiffs for recovery of the alleged arrears of salary, pension and gratuity of late Tara Chand Dosi was partly decreed only towards the amount of pension and gratuity against the defendant No. 1 State of Rajasthan and rest of the claim was disallowed.2. The plaintiff appellants are heirs of late Tara Chand Dosi who was an Assistant Engineer in the erstwhile State of Sirohi having initially entered the service on 4.7.1918. An order appointing him Assistant Engineer, Abu Road was passed on 22.1.1948. While he continued to serve as such, on 8.11.1948, the then Sirohi State entered into ...
Punjab National Bank Vs. Pnb Employees Union and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: (2006)ILLJ758Raj; 2005(4)WLC516
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Award dated August 12, 2004 of Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jaipur (for short 'CGIT') is under challenge in this writ petition.2. Following industrial dispute was referred for adjudication to the CGIT:Whether the action of the Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank, Bharatpur in imposing the punishment of reduction to a lower stage by increments upon Shri Prahlad Kumawat, Clerk is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to? 3. Respondent PNB Employees Union in the statement of claim pleaded that its member Prahlad Kumawat, Clerk-cuw-Cashier (for short 'workman') was served with a charge sheet for the alleged acts of misconduct committed by the workman. After concluding the domestic inquiry, the Inquiry Officer submitted its report to the Disciplinary Authority. Opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the workman and the Disciplinary Authority vide order dated September 30, 1999 imposed the pu...
Maharaj Himmat Singh and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-18-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj94; 2006(1)WLC278
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The present controversy has a chequered history as the controversy started when the Union of India issued a notification under Section 23(1) of the Defence and Internal Security of India Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act of 1971') for requisitioning a total land measuring 645 acres. Copy of the notification has been placed on record by the petitioners as Annex. II. The description of the property has been given in the notification which is as under: ______________________________________________________________ Name of Khasra Area in Acres Remark Village Number Jodhpur 298 7.20 State Govt. Land Jodhpur 297 13.60 area 2 1.00 acres Jodhpur 426 296.20 Private Land area Jodhpur 632 62.00 acres Jodhpur 632/1 158.00 Jodhpur 632/4 Digeri 170.00 TOTAL : 645.00 _____________________________________________________________ 3. It appears from the facts that so far as requisitioning the property by the Union of India under the Act of 19...
R.C. Lal Agrawal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(3)Raj2189
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. By this writ petition petitioner has assailed order dt. 12.12.96 (Ann.23) whereby he has been inflicted with penalty of withholding of full pension for life in exercise of power under Rule 170 of Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 ('R.S.R.'), after holding an inquiry under Rule 16 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 ('CCA Rules').2. This writ petition was earlier decided by this Court vide judgment dt. 04.05.2000 on the premises that petitioner has an alternative remedy of review available under Rule 34 of CCA Rules. However, review petition preferred by him was rejected vide order dt. 16.08.99 holding that there is no power conferred upon the Governor to review the order dt. 12.12.96. Therefore, petitioner again approached this Court by filing review petition No. 34/2000; and this Court recalled its judgment dt. 04.05.2000 vide order dt. 16.04.2001. Accordingly the matter has come up for hearing.3. Facts in brief, are that petitione...
Nanchi and ors. Vs. Lala and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2547; 2005(4)WLC311
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Plaintiff appellants have filed this Misc. Appeal under order XLIII rule 1 (U) C.P.C. against the judgment and judgment dated 14th October, 1999 passed by Additional District Judge, Neemkathana, District Sikar in Civil Appeal No. 63/87 whereby he allowed the appeal of the defendants and remanded the case to the lower court for deciding the suit afresh in accordance with the provisions of the law.2. Plaintiff-appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction on 20th April, 1976, which was decreed by the Trial Court on 28th September, 1987 in their favour. Being aggrieved with the same, the defendants filed an appeal which was allowed by Additional District Judge, Neemkathana. The lower appellate court after setting aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court remanded the matter to the trial for fresh decision. Against this judgment of the lower appellate court, the plaintiff appellants have filed the present appeal.3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.4...
Kamal Kishore Joshi Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR335]; RLW2005(4)Raj2642; 2005(4)WLC397
R.P. Vyas, J.1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dtd. 24.3.2004 Annex. 1 passed by the learned Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'.2. The main contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner was initially appointed as LDC vide order dated 18.1.1989 and he joined the duties on 21.1.1989. Therefore, the petitioner passed the efficiency test vide order dated 4.3.1993.3. Further case of the petitioner is that the State Government issued a notification dtd. 25.1.1992 providing for grant of selection grade to the Government employees on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service. The petitioner was not granted 1st selection grade on completion of 9 years of service, therefore, he submitted a representation, on which the respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 6.4.1999 informed the petitioner that he has passed the efficiency test and has been confirmed on 30.3.1993. Therefore, the 1st selection grade sh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »