Rajasthan Court April 2008 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. Lake Palace Hotels and Motels
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-2008
Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Raj)578
ORDERN.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal by Revenue, has been filed against the judgment of the Tribunal dt. 23rd March, 2004 reported as Addl. CIT v. Lake Palace Hotels & Motels Ltd. (2004) 83 TTJ (Jd) 1031. The learned CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee, and set aside the order of the learned AO, assessing capital gain at an amount of Rs. 51,39,366, on the ground of treating it to be the income, derived by the assessee by way of capital gain, as the difference in the rate of interest, on the security amount, deposited with the assessee, which interest was stipulated to at the rate of 9 per cent, while according to the assessing authority, interest rate was 18 per cent, therefore, this difference between 9 to 18 per cent, has been taken to be capital gain.2. The appeal was admitted on 7th Nov., 2005, by framing the following substantial question of law:Whether capital value of such deemed interest to the extent it has been charged lesser than the market rate can be considered as c...
Gopal @ Shri Gopal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj2973
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 17.7.1985 whereby the learned trial Court has convicted him for offence under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC'), while acquitting him of offences under Sections 147, 148, 380 and 307 of IPC. However, instead of granting the benefit of probation, the learned trial Court has sentenced him to ten months' rigorous imprisonment and has imposed a fine of Rs. 200/- and has directed that he shall undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that Ram Dutt (PW. 1) lodged a report (Ex. P/1) at the Police Station, wherein he claimed that:On 15.3.1982, in the morning, around 10' O Clock, when he went to the temple of Hanumanji, which is near his shop, Shri Gopal (the appellant), Jagdish, Nihal Singh, Ram Bharosj, Om Prakash, Data Ram and Ram Kishan and other two unidentified persons came near him. At that time, Ram Kumar Brahmin was standing near the ...
Munshi and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3388
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. Convicted for offence under Section 307 Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment and imposed with a fine of Rs. 500/- each and further directed to undergo an imprisonment of rigorous imprisonment for three months by the Sessions Judge, the appellants have challenged the judgment dated 9.1.86 before this Court.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 16.6.82, one Umrao Singh, (PW. 1), submitted a written report (Ex. P. 1) to the SHO, Police Station, Bhusawar wherein he claimed that 'on that very day in the evening around 8 O' clock when he returned from Bayana, he was told that Munshi S/o Prasadi and Munna S/o Babulal had picked up his mother, Smt. Rammo, and thrown her into a well. At that time his younger brother was not around. His younger brother ran to the village and told the villagers that Munshi and Munna have thrown his mother into the well. Upon his calling the villagers, Charan, Bhagi, Girdhari and others reache...
iqbal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3481
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Mr. Jai Raj Tantia, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that on 4.8.2007, a written report was submitted by Wahid Beg. On the basis of written report, a formal First Information Report for the offence under Sections 147,148,149,323 and 307 IPC was registered against Rehmat, Bhanwar, Aslam, Ashraf and the petition. Subsequently, the challan was submitted against the four above named persons. But as the petitioner was absconding, the challan against him was submitted under Section 299 Cr.P.C. After completion of the trial, four persons were acquitted. The petitioner, who was absconder in the case, has now moved the anticipatory bail application before this Court. The main contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that since all other co-accused persons have already been acquitted by the trial Court, no fruitful perpose will be served by arresting the petitioner.3. Since this case was heard along with othe...
Naru Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2161
G.S. Sarraf, J.1. This Misc. Petition is directed against the order dated 29.2.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.3, head quarter Khetri District Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No. 135/2007 (37/2007) whereby the application moved by the prosecution under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling Ram Singh. PW.1 has been allowed.2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial under Sections 148, 323, 24, 325, 307 and 149 IPC. During the trial the statement of the complainant Ram Singh was recorded on 3.1.2008. Thereafter, an application was moved by the prosecution on 30.1.2008 alleging therein that the complainant Ram Singh PW.1 during the course of his examination stated that the petitioner Naru Ram inflicted injury by opposite side of the axe but it was not recorded and, therefore, the complainant Ram Singh PW. 1 be recalled. Learned trial Court by order dated 29.2.2008 allowed the above application and recalled the complainant Ram Si...
Man Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2310
R.S. Chauhan, J.1. Long family feud between two neighbouring families finally erupted on 17.10.82 causing death of Brijendra on the said of the accused-appellants before this Court and alleged attempt to murder on the side of the complainant in this case. The judgment dated 30.1.85 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur has led the accused appellants to file the present appeal against their conviction. The impugned judgment has also convinced the State to file its appeal for enhancement of sentence. Since both the appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment, they are being decided by this common judgment.2. The accused appellant No. 1, Man Singh, has been convicted of offence under Section 148 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC for short) and has been sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment. He has further been convicted of offence under Section 307 IPC and sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment and has been imposed with a fine of Rs. 200/- and to further undergo one mon...
State and ors. Vs. Anil Kumar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj2830
N.P. Gupta, J.1. This Special Appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan, against the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 21.9.1999, allowing the writ petition of the present respondents, who are 5 in number, precisely relying on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, in Vijay Singh Deora and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and appointed on ad-hoc basic as Junior Engineers, and were continued in service as degree holder Junior Engineers, till they were regularly selected later on, and during the period of their recruitment as ad-hoc, and till they were regularised in service, there was no break in the service, several persons among the diploma holder Junior Engineers have acquired Engineering Degrees, who were transferred to the seniority list of degree holder Junior Engineers, and that in doing so, an error was committed, and those transferred persons were shown senior to the petitioners, on the ground, that the appointment of the petitioners was ad-hoc, though prior in time. I...
Dharam Chand Lamba Vs. R.S.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR503]; RLW2008(4)Raj3282
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner is seeking direction to declare impugned charge sheet dated 11/2/1991 (Annex.7) illegal and unconstitutional so also prayed that the said charge sheet may be quashed and further prayed that respondents may be directed to grant selection grade and other admissible benefits to the petitioner.2. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner was appointed as Conductor on 21/7/1977, thereafter, he was confirmed on the said post. According to petitioner he always performed his duties with zeal and dedication. On 20/6/1983 (Annex. I) he was charge sheeted by the Divisional Manager, Bikaner and after inquiry services of petitioner were terminated vide order dated 25/1/1985.3. Petitioner preferred a civil suit before learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur City against his termination and the said suit was allowed and decree was passed in his favour in which the order of termination was set aside and petitioner was direc...
Kalu Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj298
Raghuvendra S. Rathore, J.1. The accused-appellant has filed this appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 5.6.85 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Baran in Sessions Case No. 54/83 whereby he has convicted him for the offence under Section 326 IPC, sentence for 3 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and also for the offence under Section 323 IPC, sentenced for 1 year R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-.2. This case was initiated on a report lodged by Anandi Lal Mali on 7.2.83 at Police Station Mangrol, District Kota (now Baran). It was stated in the report that the informant had gone to his fields to water them by canal water. It is further stated in the report that the informant found that the accused appellant had blocked the flow of water. It is also stated in the report that when the informant reached the field of Latoor Mali, the accused-appellant had asked the informant as to why he had taken water from the canal when he had cleaned the ...
Samad Kanwar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)WLN532
Govind Mathur, J.1. The petitioner, by this petition for writ, claiming family pension being widow of late Shri Bhanwar Singh, who was compulsorily retired from service on 23.03.1983 as a consequent to disciplinary action and also died on 17.08.2006. The respondents denied family pension to the petitioner on the count that regular pension was not accorded to Shri Bhanwar Singh and he was getting only compassionate pension as per the provisions of Rule 172 of the Rajasthan Civil Service Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1951').2. While assailing validity of the decision of the respondents, the contention of Counsel for the petitioner is that imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement does not preclude the persons so retired from getting pension, if no order as per the provisions of Rule 172-A of the Rules of 1951 is issued.3. Per contra, the stand of the respondents is that the petitioner was retired compulsorily by way of imposition of penalty and, therefore, he...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »