Rajasthan Court July 2006 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sulabh Marbles (P) Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: (2006)205CTR(Raj)464
1. Office objection is overruled.2. Heard learned Counsel for the appeEant.3. This appeal is directed against the order of Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, dt. 14th Sept., 2004.The Revenue seeks to raise following substantial question of law arising for consideration in this appeal:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of learned CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 13,53,310 by holding that there was no specific finding recorded by the AO for rejection of the book results and in the absence of any defects in the books of account, the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the impugned addition ?4. The AO has rejected the books of account of assessee. The books of account were rejected not on the ground that any of the details of sale and purchase were found to be wrong but on the basis of amount paid for power and fuel consumption to the Electricity Department. The AO assumed that looking to the bills ...
Jodhpur Sahkari Upbhokta Wholesale Bhandar Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3422
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by M/s. Jodhpur Sahkari Upbhokta Wholesale Bhandar Limited, Jodhpur challenging the order dated 22.10.96 passed by the Labour Court, Jodhpur. By this award the Labour Court answered to the reference on an industrial dispute made to it by appropriate Government vide order dated 28th May, 1997. Reference made was whether termination of the respondent No. 2 from service of the petitioner on 15.6.1987 was legal and justified and if not, what relief the workman was entitled to. The case of the respondent-workman before the learned Labour Court was that he was initially appointed with the respondents on 26.10.1967 and continued to work with them till 15th June, 1987. He had completed 240 days in a calender year immediately preceding the date of removal. A reference on the same subject matter was earlier made through Union as Labour Case No. 88/89 which was decided by the Labour Court vide award dated 22.9.1993 but the respondent No. 2 co...
Parasmal Oswal and ors. Vs. Gurucharan Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-13-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(3)Raj2515
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This is a claimants' appeal against the award dated 18.8.1993 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pali in Claim Case No. 2/1991 seeking enhancement over the compensation amount of Rs. 2,53,750/- awarded by the Tribunal on account of accidental death of Rajendra Kumar, aged 25 years, brother of appellant No. 1, son of appellant No. 2 and husband of appellant No. 3.2. Brief facts relevant for determination of the questions involved in this appeal are that on 17.9.1990 deceased Rajendra Kumar while repairing his moped in front of Rotary Building at Pali was hit by a truck bearing registration No. PAT 8619. The truck run over the deceased who expired for the injuries sustained in the accident. The claimants pointed out the age of deceased at 25 years and his earning at about Rs. 4000/- per month from his independent business. Stating losses on various heads, the claimants claimed compensation in the sum of Rs. 26 lacs. The claim was put to contest by the in...
Mewar Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi Rawat
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-13-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3067; 2006(4)WLC793
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties on the stay application.2. Learned Counsel for appellant contended that appeal has already been admitted, therefore, judgment and decree of eviction passed by both the court below be stayed during pendency of this second appeal.3. Learned Counsel for the plaintiff-respondent contended that both the courts below have passed a decree of eviction of the rented premises in favour of the plaintiff-respondent on the ground 'non-user of the rented premises' by the defendant-tenant and, in case any interim stay is granted against eviction by this Court on the ground that appeal has already been admitted then at-least the mesne profit as per prevalent market rate of monthly rent of the rented premises should be fixed during the pendency of this second appeal.4. Learned Counsel for the respondent has filed additional affidavit on 11th of May, 2006 with copy to the counsel for the appellant. The time was sought by the learned Counsel...
Vishnu Dutt Sharma Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-13-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3248
Chatra Ram Jat, J.1. In the instant appeals challenge is made to the judgment dated November 28th, 2001 of Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 1 (Fast Track), Jaipur City, Jaipur, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:Under Section. 302 I.P.C.To undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year.Under Section. 201 I.P.C.To undergo imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months.2. It is the prosecution case that Radha Mohan Sharma (PW-2), father of the deceased Anuradha had lodged a report (Ex. 4) in the Police Station Mansarovar, Jaipur on 12.11.1997 with the allegations that on the said day around 4.30 AM Darshan who happened to be a friend of the complainant informed him about receiving a telephonic call giving information that his daughter was not well and that he was asked to come up. He then told his son Himansh...
Harchand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-12-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3000; 2006(1)WLC332
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions Case No. 28/87 on 26.11.1987 whereby the learned trial Judge has convicted the appellant for committing offence under Section 8/18, Narcotic Drugs &Psychotropic; Substances Act, 1985 (in short, 'the Act' herein after) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.2. As per the facts of the case, PW.l Guman Singh, A.S.I., Police Station Chitalwana received information through informer that some person is carrying opium on the camel going to Barmer from the side of village Sangrawa. Upon that information, PW.l Guman Singh, A.S.I. Alongwith Head Constable Jalam Singh and other Constables Mangal Singh, Nathu Singh, Harlal and Lakha Ram went towards the way from Sangrawa to Barmer. As per the prosecution story, after some time, they...
Rajendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-12-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3040
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Since matter relates to interpretation of Section 329 Cr.P.C. we proceed to Finally dispose of the instant appeal at this stage.2. The appellant in the instant appeal has impugned the judgment dated May 12, 2006 of the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jhun-jhunu, whereby the appellant was convicted Under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default, to further suffer one month's rigorous imprisonment.3. It is contended by learned Counsel for the appellant that the appellant was of unsound mind and incapable of defending himself, therefore, in view of Section 84 I.P.C. he did not commit any offence.The question that requires consideration is whether the appellant at the time of commission of offence was suffering from insanity or not and whether it was legal insanity so as to give appellant the benefit of Section 84 I.P.C?4. A look at...
Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN254
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 01.02.1988 passed by Sessions Judge, Dungarpur in sessions case No. 39/1987 whereby the learned Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused namely Narayan, Kanti @ Kaliya, Bhagu, Ratna and Nana for offence under Sections 148 and 307/149 read with Section 324/149 I.P.C. and granted benefits of probation to accused Kanti @ Kalia while recording the finding of guilt against him and convicting him for offence under Section 323 I.P.C. and the present appellant Narayan was convicted for committing offence under Section 324 I.P.C. and sentenced to one and half year RI along with the fine of Rs. 500/-. Further it was ordered that if the amount of fine of Rs. 500/- is deposited by accused Narayan, then, injured Banshilal and Nathulal may be paid Rs. 150/- each and Mohanlal may be paid Rs. 200/- as compensation.2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that as per the prosecution story, on 20.04.1...
Sayeed Moeen and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-11-2006
Reported in: RLW2006(4)Raj3036
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Sayeed Moeen, the appellant herein, along with three co-accused, was put to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Ajmer, who vide judgment dated January 16, 2003 convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:Under Section 302 I.P.C.To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for six months.Under Section 3/25 Arms Act:To suffer imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month.The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.Co-accused Hussain Ujjaman was discharged and Sayeed Fareed and Aziz Rehman stood acquitted. Acquittal of co-accused has been assailed by the State of Rajasthan and complainant in appeal No. 1248/2003 and revision petition No. 559/2003 respectively.2. As per the prosecution story Saiyad Riyaz Ali @ Pappu suddenly disappeared on September 24, 1999. His elder brother Hasan Mazhar A...
Kala @ Kalia Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-11-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)WLN424
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.04.1988 passed by Sessions Judge, Dungarpur in Sessions case No. 65/1987whereby the appellant was acquitted from the charge of offence under Section 302 IPC and convicted for offence under Section 323 IPC and he was sentenced to one year simple imprisonment.2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that appellant is real elder brother of deceased. As per the contention of FIR, some quarrel took place in between Shankar and Kala - the present appellant. During the quarrel, the appellant gave a kick in the stomach of Shankar on account of which he died. After investigation, the police filed challan under Section 302 IPC against the appellant. As per the prosecution witness PW-7 Dr. Bhagwati Prasad, who conducted the post-mortem, Shankar died on account of head injury. However relying upon the testimony of PW-2 Ghoola to the extent that the accused gave kick in the stomach of Shankar ...