Rajasthan Court July 2007 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.
Gajanand Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)WLN91
K.S. Rathore, J.1. This writ petition is preferred by the petitioner Gajanand Sharma, Ex-Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bai, District Sikar praying that the Govt. Girls Secondary School, Bai should be shifted to the newly constructed building. It is also submitted that earlier shifting order was passed but the same has been stayed vide impugned order dt. 13.09.2006 and on account of political pressure shifting was not carried out.2. On the contrary, learned Addl. GA appearing for the respondent State submits that the petitioner has no locus to file the present writ petition in individual capacity as the present writ petition is not filed in the form of Public Interest Litigation, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.3. It is not disputed that the new building of the Government Girls Secondary School has been constructed with the help of donor and the fund is also given by the Member of Parliament, but it is disputed whether the old building is sufficient to run the school or...
Ladulal and anr. Vs. Smt. Munni Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)WLN167
Vineet Kothari, J.1. This second appeal arises out of the concurrent judgments of the two Courts below in a rent eviction case. Learned trial Court allowed the plaintiff's suit for eviction of the suit shop situated at Village Niwai on the ground of personal bonafide necessity of the plaintiff-landlord, Smt. Munni Devi.2. The trial Court while deciding issue Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 relating to personal bonafide necessity, comparative hardship and partial eviction held in favour of the plaintiff after recording the evidence of both the sides and discussing the case laws as many as 12 of them including the various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court held in a judgment running into 24 pages that the plaintiff's husband has no other alternative shop to carry on his business whereas the defendant had as many as five shops out of which two shops allotted in his favour in 1986 were sub-let by him and since the shop owned and possessed by the plaintiff was only of 6-7 feet of width whereas the d...
Mohammed HussaIn Khatri Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)WLN566
K.S. Rathore, J.1. As per the directions of this Court, Shri N.K. Khare, Sr. Town Planner is present in person before this Court. He submits that as per Annexure-12 dated 15.05.2002, if the petitioner leaves 40 feet wide road and also in front of commercial shopping complex shall make provisions of parking as per rules, then the case of the petitioner will be considered for land use from residential to commercial.2. The petitioner undertakes to do needful in this regard and after leaving 40 feet wide road in front of the complex shall provide parking facility as per norms prescribed by the Municipality and shall inform the authorities concerned to inspect the site and on inspection/verification, if it is found according to the norms, then the Municipality is directed to recommend the case of the petitioner for land use from residential to commercial. So far as set back is concerned, the case of the petitioner can be compounded as per the provisions of law by the competitive authority.3...
Kota Mini Bus Malik Sangh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Raj228
ORDERMohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by Kota Mini Bus Malik Sangh with the prayer that the respondents be restrained by writ of probation from issuing stage carriage permits to tempo, three wheeler, minldor, auto-rickshaw manufactured by Bajaj Tempo Ltd. in Kota and be further restrained them from allowing the minidor operators to ply the minidor auto-rickshaw as stage carriage.2. I have heard Shri Mahesh Sharrna, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.N. Gupta, the learned Deputy Government Advocate for State.3. The petitioner-association is a union of mini bus owners who ply mini buses in the city of Kota. It is contented that the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') classifies the vehicles as stage carriage and contract carriage depending upon their seating capacity. A motor vehicle which has the seating capacity of more than six passengers excluding driver is classified according to Section 2(40) of the Act as stage carriage whereas contr...
Lurgi Metallurgie Gmbh Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-2007
Reported in: 2008[9]STR451
ORDER1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the issuance of show cause notice dt. 11-5-2006 (Annex.3). The show cause notice was issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-II. By the aforesaid show cause notice, the petitioner is called upon to show cause and explain as to why the service tax amounting to Rs. 91,67,098/- and education cess amounting to Rs. 28,235/- should not be demanded and recovered from the petitioner under the erstwhile Section 73(1)(a) and proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. The petitioner has also been asked to show cause and explain as to why interest as applicable should not be recovered from him under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. Show cause notice is also issued in connection with penalty. It is the aforesaid show cause notice which is impugned at the instance of the petitioner.2. The learned advocate Mr. Ramit Mehta submitted that issuance of show cause notice is without any basis and foundation and unde...
Shripat and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-2007
Reported in: RLW2008(1)Raj591
Guman Singh, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 17.9.2001 of the learned Sessions Judge, Karauli, whereby appellants- Shripat and Makhan Lal were convicted and sentenced as under:Under Section 364-A IPC,to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment.2. As per prosecution story, FIR was registered on the basis of Parcha Bayan of Mulya S/o Shri Khasa Jatav, aged 70 years, R/o Mogepura, P.S. Mandrayal, on 19.12.1999 at about 8.30 PM. In the report, informant Mulya stated that about 12 days prior to Deepawali he had gone to his hut set up by him in the 'Dang' (ravines) of Tushmaee where he used to keep his cows. At some distance, other villagers had also set up their huts. On the night of the occurrence, while he was sleeping in his hut, he was asked to get up and he saw six persons standing near his cot. Amongst them Shripat, Ramraj, Rajkamal and Makhan were from his village and they were armed wi...
Rajaram Kandoi Vs. Divisional Commissioner and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Raj233
ORDERMohammad Rafiq, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 22-3-1999 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Jaipur whereby his revision petition was only partly accepted with the direction that after 15-12-1997 the disputed land and building were partitioned between the petitioner-Rajaram Kandoi and his brother Naresh Kumar Kandoi as per the decree of the Civil Court, therefore, the same should be considered as separate units for the purpose of assessment of the land and building tax. The petitioner has also challenged the order passed by the appellate authority dated 21 -3-1998 and the order passed by the Assessing Authority dated 22-3-1996 whereby the aforeasaid two units for the purpose of assessment were treated as one unit.2. I have heard Shri P.S. Sharma, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.N. Gupta, the learned Deputy Government Advocate.3. Shri P.S. Sharma argued that the petitioner had purchased the land jointly with his brother paying for...
Mst. Prem Bai Vs. Kela Ram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Raj238
ORDERMohammad Rafiq, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 17-8-2001 passed by the Board of Revenue and the judgment dated 5-1-1994 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer and has prayed that the judgment passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner dated 17-9-96 be restored and it be directed that the mutation No. 254 inter alia in favour of the petitioner on 22-12-1992 by Tehsildar Sangodh was just and proper.2. It is claimed that the petitioner being the only daughter of Shri Mangi Lal, she continued to reside with him even after marriage in Village Dhulet of Tehsil Sangod. Shri Mangi Lal was the khatedar tenant of the land of khasra No. 66. Since her father suddenly died on 20-12-92, after his death, She being her only legal heir, the mutation was opened in her name by Tehsildar on 22-12-92. The respondent No. 1 filed appeal against such mutation stating that father of the petitioner Mangi Lal had executed a Will in his favour on 11-12-1992 and further that he was ...
Jagdish Sharma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-20-2007
Reported in: (2008)217CTR(Raj)472; RLW2007(4)Raj3127
Vineet Kothari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming the following reliefs:(i) quash the impugned attachment order dated 17.04.2007 (Annexure-11) and further direct the respondents to release all the 3 FDRs of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- lying with Jaipur Thar Gramin Bank, at Bhankrota, Distt. Jaipur; and(ii) direct the respondents to exclude the period during which the FDRs of the petitioner remained attached in computing the period of two years as prescribed in Section 54B of the Act for the purchase of agricultural land; and(iii) quash and set-aside the impugned order dated 01.05.2007 (An-nexure-12) followed by order dated 16.05.2007 (Annexure-13) passed by the respondent No. 3 & 2; and kindly direct the respondent No. 3 to keep the recovery proceedings in abeyance till the disposal of 1st appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Jaipur; and(iv) The costs of the writ petition may also be awarded t...
Western Rajasthan Colour Lab Association Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-20-2007
Reported in: 2008[9]STR351
ORDER1. After recalling the order dated 21st April, 2005, by a separate order passed in D.B. Civil Misc. Application No. DR(J)1203/06, we have heard learned Counsel for the parties on merit of the writ petition.2. The petitioner No. 1 is an association of individuals and firms who are engaged in business of running Photo and Colour Labs and are also engaged in the business of processing (i.e. developing and printing) colour photographic films. The petitioner No. 2 is one of the member of the Association. The dispute relates to the manner in which the value of service, rendered by them is to be computed for the purpose of determining Service Tax payable by them.Under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, the value of taxable service is defined as gross amount charged by 'the service providers' for such service rendered by them. In the wake of this general definition, an Explanation has been inserted under Section 67 specifying certain individual cases of different kinds of services for t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »