Rajasthan Court August 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.
Dr. Shishupal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-18-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3689
ORDERGovind Mathur, J.1. To be considered for appointment as Professor (MBA) at Engineering College, Bikaner, the petitioner appeared before a competent selection committee on 3.4.2007, however, the recommendation of such committee was not placed before the Executive Committee of the College, hence this petition for writ is preferred seeking directions as follows:I. by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may be directed to place the recommendations of the selection committee for the post of Professor in MBA department undertaken pursuant to the advertisement dated 4.1.2007 before the executive council of the Engineering College Bikaner for consideration forthwith or within such time as this Hon'ble Court may deem fir to prescribe;II. by an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the event, the petitioner is recommended and approved for appointment, the respondents may be directed to offer appointment to the petitioner on the post of Professor in MBA department wit...
C.i.T. Vs. K.K. Enterprises
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-18-2008
Reported in: [2009]178TAXMAN187(Raj)
Kishan Swaroop Chaudhari, J.1. Appellant has filed this appeal against the order of learned ITAT dated 01.06.2005, by which the appeal of respondent was allowed and appeal of appellant was dismissed.2. Brief facts of the case are that assesseerespondent submitted Return of Income for the Assessment Year 1997-98, and on scrutiny, Assessing Authority found that assessee sold land as per sale-deeds at a low price aggregated at Rs. 18.66 per sq.ft whereas rate was atleast Rs. 40 per sq.ft. and thus he added Rs. 17,14,418 in assessee's income on this count. Further, he disallowed depreciation of Rs. 5,86,344 on three tankers on the ground that these tankers were not given on lease and they were not put in use for that assessment year. On appeal, CIT (A) vide his order dated 15.09.2000 partly accepted appeal of the assessee, and assumed that land was sold at the rate of Rs. 22 per sq.ft. instead of Rs. 20 and thus deleted Rs. 14,99,345 as income from sale proceeds of land and further allowed...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kirti Kumar Shah
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-18-2008
Reported in: [2009]176TAXMAN29(Raj)
ORDER1. This appeal is filed by the revenue against the judgment of the Tribunal dated 6-5-2005, accepting the appeal of the assessee, and setting aside the orders of the Assessing Officer, and the Commissioner, Income-tax (Appeals), and thereby deleting the surcharge, as levied under Section 113 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was admitted on 4-4-2006, by framing a substantial question, reading as under:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that levy of surcharge while computing tax demand is debatable issue and hence non-levy of it could not be made subject-matter of application for rectification under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Thus, the question precisely comprehends the aspect, as to whether the levy of surcharge, while computing the tax demand is a debatable issue or not. Learned Assessing Officer has passed a very short order (Annex 4), holding, that on examination of assessment records it is noticed, th...
Naresh Kumar Yadav Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-18-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj987
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition seeks to challenge the order of the government dated 10.3.2000 whereby the respondents refused to provide employment to the petitioner in terms of their Circular dated 29.10.1976.2 Learned Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order on the premise that government by the aforesaid policy circular decided to provide employment to atleast two persons of the dependants of the deceased/wounded army personnel subject to fulfilling eligibility criteria of educational qualification etc.3. Shri Mahendra Goyal, learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner applied for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-Ill. He was having qualification of B.A. & B.Ed, ad even fulfilled the eligibility criteria for appointment on the post of Physical Teacher under Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971. This Court vide its earlier order dated 4.5.1998 passed in her earlier writ petition directed the respondents to consider...
Gopal Lal Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-18-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1721
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This writ petition seeks to challenge the order of suspension of the petitioner dated 22.12.2005.2. Petitioner was working as Agriculture Supervisor in the Directorate of Agriculture, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur. The real elder brother of the petitioner Bhanwar Lal passed away on 24.8.1981. Since he had died intestate, according to the petitioner, he performed his last rite and even the turban was tied on his head as per the customs prevalent in his community. Wife of the petitioner's elder brother started living with her parents and then there arose certain disputes between them with regard to partition of the ancestral properties in so far as share of Bhanwar Lal was concerned. His wife filed two civil suits in Sambhar Lake in the year 2003. However, no interim order of injunction was passed in the civil suits. She thereafter filed two criminal complaints in the Court of Magistrate at Jobner, District Jaipur which were sent to Police Station for investigation...
Keshav Deo Katara and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(3)Raj2487
Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.1. These two appeals are arising out of the common judgment of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No. 5 Jaipur City, Jaipur dated June 4; 1987, hence both are decided by a common judgment.2. This is an appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated June 4, 1987 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No. 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 12/1984 whereby he convicted the accused-appellants Keshavdeo, Raj Bahadur, Radhey Singh and Munna Lal for the offences under Section 148, 323 and 325 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and convict them as under:Under Section 148 IPC. One year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 50/-; in default 15 days simple imprisonment to each Under Section 323, 325 readwith Section 149 IPC:-2 years rigorous imprisonment & fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment one month simple imprisonment to each.3. The learned trial Court convicted the accused-appellant Naresh Chand Sharma for th...
Shri Agarwal Shiksha Samiti and anr. Vs. Moti Chand JaIn and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2008
Reported in: (2009)IILLJ616Raj
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. All these appeals arise from a common order of learned Single judge whereby, the appellant Samiti was directed to make payment of gratuity to the respondents along with interest. The order does not call for interference in view of the ratio indicated in Children Garden Play School Education Society v. Raj Nan Government Educational Institutions] Tribunal and Ors. (2008) 3 WLC (Raj) 147 wherein, the Division Bench of this Court held that non-government educational institutions are bouna to pay gratuity to the employees worked with them since gratuity is a benefit arising from past service and meant for relief and assistance after retirement or cessation of employment.3. Insofar as awarding interest is concerned, we are of the opinion that argument in this regard ought to have been advanced before the learned Single Judge. In the special appeal the submission which was not advanced before the learned Single Judge, cannot be...
Kedar Nath Methi Vs. Mithan Lal (Since Deceased) Through His Legal Rep ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3593
ORDERNarendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Admit. Mr. Banwari Sharma, advocate appears for respondents.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. The sole plaintiff Mithan Lal filed a suit for ejecment in respect of disputed property against defendant petitioner on the ground of personal bonafide necessity of himself and default in making the payment of rent. During the pendency of the suit, the sole plaintiff Mithan Lal died and thereafter his legal representatives were substituted in his place. The legal representatives moved an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment in the plaint pleading the bonafide necessity of Smt. Saraswati Devi, widow of Mithan Lal, of the disputed premise. The application was contested by the defendant. The trial court vide its order dated 30th October, 2007 allowed the application. Being aggrieved with the same, the present writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the defendant petitioner.4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that earlie...
Rohitash Singh Vs. Prithvi Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Raj1; RLW2008(4)Raj3599
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The plaintiff-respondents No. 1 and 2 filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation for their alleged malicious prosecution in the trial court. The summons were issued to the defendants. The defendant No. 1/respondent No. 3 Kawal Singh filed his written-statement. So far as defendant No. 2/petitioner is concerned, he did not file any written statement; he filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for dismissal of the suit on the ground that he is a public servant and the act, alleged to have been done by him, was so done by him in the official capacity, hence, as per the provisions of Section 80 of the CPC, a notice was necessary to be served upon him but the plaintiffs did not serve any notice upon him.3. The learned trial court, vide its order dated 31st October, 2002, rejected the application only on the ground that without filing written-statement on behalf of the defendant No. 2/petitioner...
Promuk Hoffman International Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj216
Shanker Asopa, J.1. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in these two writ petitions, therefore, both have been clubbed, heard and are being decided together.2. By S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3134/2006, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 10.4.2006 (Anx. 11) by which the respondent No. 2 has disqualified the petitioner from participating in the financial bid. The petitioner company has prayed for production of the entire record of the said Bid and notice for invitation of bid for High Security Registration Plates (in short 'HSRP') and quashing of the said order dated 10.4.2006 with the further prayer that the direction be issued to the respondents to treat the petitioner company as qualified and simultaneously allow it to take part in further process of tender. The petitioner company has also prayed that the respondents be restrained from proceeding further in the tender process by awarding the contract to any other party and issuing the Letter...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »