Rajasthan Court August 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.
Master Arpit Dadhich Vs. Managing Committee, St. Edmund's School and O ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj193; 2006(2)WLC58
K.S. Rathore, J.1. Since similar controversy is involved in both the writ petitions these petitions are being decided by this common order. The facts of the writ petition No. 710/05 are taken as a leading case,2. The petitioner's son was studying in St. Edmund's School, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur in 12th Standard with commerce subject. It was alleged that the petitioner's son along with other students of his class fired crackers in the school. On this act of the petitioner's son, his name was struck of from the roll of regular student and he was not allowed to attend the regular class. Vide order dated 1st March, 2005 this Court allowed him to appear provisionally in the examination of 12th Standard subject to decision of this writ petition.3. Learned Counsel for the CBSE referred Rules 11 and 12 of the Examination bye-laws which deals with the admission to examinations, according to which, only regular candidate who is on the active rolls of the School and who has completed a regular cours...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Bhanwar Devi and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC856; RLW2005(4)Raj2641; 2005(4)WLC358
N.P. Gupta, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner,2. By the impugned award, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 4,42,262/-, and after adjusting the amount under no fault liability award, the award has been passed for the rest of the amount.3. Learned Counsel submits that the multiplier employed is incorrect, inasmuch as, the claimants were the parents, and therefore, the multiplier relevant to the age of the claimant should have been employed. The other submission made is that since the deceased was traveling on the roof of the bus, therefore also, the finding on issue of negligence requires interference.4. Obviously, the award is appealable under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Learned counsel points out that since the petitioner was not granted any permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the petitioner cannot file appeal, therefore, the petitioner has filed writ petition.5. I am afraid the present writ petition cannot be...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ganganagar Wines
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(Raj)427
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for. the appellant. In spite of service no one present for the respondents.2. This appeal is directed against the order of Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, dt. 27th Oct., 2003. The substantial question of law framed at the time of admission for consideration in this appeal is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions which have been made after invoking the proviso to Section 145 of the Act and whether the finding of the learned Tribunal is perverse ?' 3. The facts of the present case are that the assessee-respondent is a liquor contractor for wholesale and retail sale for both country liquor and Indian made foreign liquor. The assessee has submitted his return for asst. yr. 1993-94 showing his total income as 18,27,180 as per P&L; a/c which was reduced (increased) to Rs. 22,73,630 while issuing intimation under Section 143(1)(a) after making certain adjustment.4. ...
Prakash Chand SaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj149; 2005(4)WLC550
V.K. Bali, J.1. The prosecution on the basis of extra judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant before Sanwar Mal (PW-7), a Peon of the school and recovery of string on the basis of disclosure statement said to have been made by the appellant, was able to secure conviction of the appellant Under Section 302 IPC for murder of Devi Lal, a child of tender years residing in hostel of the school where he was studying.2. Learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sikar held the appellant guilty for offence Under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life as also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo R.I. for a period of three months, vide orders dated 1.5.2001. It is against this order that the present appeal has been filed.3. The questions that need determination are as to whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, reliance could be placed on the circumstantial evidence relied by the prosecution ...
Bheekam Chand Vs. Ismail and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj1
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This Second Appeal No.. 263/1993 filed by the plaintiff- appellant on 30-11 -1993 has now come up for admission after having been dismissed in default and restored thrice over by this Court, This appeal has been submitted against (he judgment and decree dated 16-8-1993 passed by the Civil Judge, Ratangarh in Civil Appeal No. 14/1990 whereby the learned Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff-appellant against the judgment and . decree dated 12-8-1983 passed by the Munslf, Sujangarh dismissing Civil Suit No. 105/1980 (116/1974) filed by the appellant seeking perpetual injunction against the defendants for restraining them from dispossessing him from the suit property.2. Brief facts relevant for the present purposes are that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit seeking perpetual injunction against the defendants-respondents on 17-5 1974 on the averments and allegations that the property in question described in para 1 of the plaint was of the ownership a...
Rukma (Smt.) Vs. Shyam Lal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj2995
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit for eviction against the defendant/appellant alleging that the defendant is a tenant in the suit property on a rent of Rs. 150/- per month. The defendant paid rent to the plaintiff upto the period of January, 1982 but thereafter, she did not pay any rent to the plaintiff, therefore, the plaintiff sought a decree for eviction of tenant on the ground of default committed by the defendant in payment of rent. The plaintiff also pleaded that the suit property has been sublet to one NA Ansari by the plaintiff on monthly rent of Rs. 300/-. Yet another ground for eviction is that the suit property is required for the personal need of the plaintiff as the plaintiff is residing in a rented house and the plaintiff has a large family of 14 members.3. The defendant submitted written statement alleging that she is owner of the house and she is residing in the house sinc...
Saroj Devi and ors. Vs. Suresh Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC116
N.K. Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment/award dated 6th August, 1997 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur in MACT Case No. 186/94 for enhancement of the amount of compensation in respect of death of Maharaj Singh who is said to have died in an accident arising out of motor vehicle which took place on 11.2.1994.2. The Counsel for the appellant contended that looking to the age and income of the deceased the amount of Rs. 1,44,400/- awarded as compensation in the present case is meagre amount. He contended that the deceased was working in Post Office and his salary was Rs. 2,000/- per month and in addition to it he was also earning by selling milk in the village and from agricultural sources also. His submission is that future prospects of the deceased ought to have been considered. He further submits that in view of his age as 24 years, the multiplier of 17 ought to have been applied by the Tribunal.3. The Counsel for the respondent ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Paras Cotton Co.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: (2007)209CTR(Raj)356; [2007]288ITR211(Raj)
ORDERReturn of income has been filed on October 8, 1997, vide R. No. 3183 declaring total income of Rs. 60,250 in the status of PFAS. This case has been selected for scrutiny on random sample basis by issue of notice under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act.In response to notice under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, Shri S.C. Agarwal, advocate, and authorised representative of the assessee attended with whom case has been discussed. After discussion, returned income is accepted.Assessed under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act. Issue necessary forms. Give credit for prepaid taxes. Bhilwara sd/. R.S. Kedawal, dated June 16, 1998, Income-tax Officer, Ward I, Bhilwara.OFFICE NOTE : In this case proposed for taking this case for check scrutiny along with assessment records was sent to the DCIT, Ajmer, vide this office letter No. 1355, dated March 10, 1998, up to May 25, 1998, check approval from the DCIT, Ajmer, and assessment records not reed, and in the meantime this case has b...
Prem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2597
V.K. Bali, J.1. Prem Singh and Rajendra, the appellants herein were tried with five others for offences under Sections 364A, 326, 395 and 148 and various other offences of the Indian Penal Code. The co-accused of appellants Rupa, Bahadur, Fatte, Prem Singh son of Shridhar and Sube have been acquitted. The appellants however, been convicted under Section 364-A and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment as also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months imprisonment. They have also been convicted under Section 326 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years as also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three month imprisonment. They have also been found guilty for offence under Section 395 and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment as also to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months imprisonment. The appellants ...
Vishnu and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2608; 2005(4)WLC700
V.K. Bali, J.1. Six appellants namely Vishnu, Mahesh, Brahmanand, Kanta Prasad, Bhanwar Lal and Lata Bai, who were tried with their co-accused Kanhaiya Lal in connection with murder of Sukhlal and causing injuries to five others, under various offences, have filed the present appeal challenging order of conviction and sentence recorded against them by the learned Sessions Judge, Karauli who vide his order dated 17.4.1998 held them guilty Under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo life imprisonment as also to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo S.I. for a period of two months. They were also held guilty and thus convicted Under Section 325/149 IPC and sentenced to R.I. for one year and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for two months. They were also held guilty Under Section 323/149 IPC and sentenced to three months' RI. Appellants Vishnu and Kanta have also been h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »