Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Sep-06-1978
Reported in : 1981(8)ELT440(Raj); 1978(11)WLN481
..... wire rods and casting, not otherwise specified.'the excise duty was levied upon them at the rate mentioned against the said sub-items. therefore, from 1960 until the finance act, 1969 came into force, it is clear that the legislature did not levy any excise duty upon the goods in question. hence it is only with effect from ..... mistake then and thereafter, within three years, the writ petition under article 226 of the constitution was submitted to this court on july 14, 1970. the period prescribed under the limitation act, 1963, is three years from the date when the mistake becomes known to the plaintiff and even applying this rule of limitation to the writ ..... heard together and the questions involved in all of them are the same.2. it will suffice to state the facts in writ petition no. 1961 of 1970. the petitioner in connection with its business of manufacture of aluminium conductor steel reinforced and all aluminium conductors, imported electrolytic grade aluminium wire rods which were not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Feb-01-1978
Reported in : AIR1978Raj116; 1978(11)WLN55
..... of policy or expediency. the necessity to record reasons is greater if the order is subject to appeal.' 11. in testeels ltd. v. n. m. desai, air 1970 guj 1 (fb), it was held as under (at pp. 4, 7 and 10) :--'both on principle and on authority, every administrative officer exercising quasi-judicial functions ..... conciliation officer exercises quasi-judicial function while hearing and disposing of an application by the employer under the proviso to section 33(2)(b) of the industrial disputes act by which he seeks the approval of the conciliation officer for discharging its employee during the pendency of an industrial dispute before the said authority. hence, he ..... appellant was that the review petition contained allegations which were wholly irrelevant with regard to the scope of the enquiry conducted under section 17(4) of the act, and had no relevancy with the charges levelled against the petitioner. it was also contended that certain allegations made by the non-petitioner babu lal were the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Aug-28-1978
Reported in : 1978(11)WLN406
..... material objects, (and the commissioner shall be deemed to be a civil court for all the purposes of section 125 and of chapter xxxv of the code of criminal procedure, 1898 (v of 1898).section 30 of the act provides for hearing of appeals against the orders of the commissioner. the orders which can form the subject matter of appeal to the ..... a court subordinate to the high court under section 115 c.p.c. was followed by the madhya pradesh high court in sk. amir v. jardarbag 1970 l.i.c. 1656. the learned single judge of the madhya pradash high court in para 15 has observed as under:i respectfully agree with the view held by patna, ..... the re opening of the proceedings was that notices of the objections were not issued to the state government as required by the u.p. zamindari abolition and land reforms act, 1950 (act no. 1 of 1951) and that the state government, having no knowledge of the objections could not appear and contest the case set up by the raja. the contention .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-23-1978
Reported in : 1978WLN(UC)167
..... criminal procedure came into force. the proviso to clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 484 of the new code clearly jays down that every enquiry under chapter xviii of the old code which was pending on the date on which the new come came into force, shall be dealt with and disposed of in accordance with the ..... the application of sanwat raj against raid ram. after the decision of the appeal, sanwat raj non-petitioner no. 2, filed a complaint against the petitioner on 22nd july, 1970, in the court of the munsiff magistrate. balorta, under section 466. ipc because the sessions judge, which dismissing the appeal observed that sanwat raj was fee to take legal ..... by any of the parries to the proceedings before the change. it is, however, equally well-settled that the validity or operation of any order validly pissed or any act validly done by judicial tribunal under the procedural, law for the time being in force cannot be affected by any subsequent change in the said law. it, therefore, follows .....
Tag this Judgment!