Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1987)65CTR(Raj)91; [1988]170ITR375(Raj)
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this reference, which relates to the assessment year 1972-73, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as ' the Tribunal'), has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,the Tribunal was justified in holding that by the amended trust deed of 1958, the assessee-trust has not acquired the status of a trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes in order to entitle it to exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee-trust is not entitled to exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 '2. Laxminarain Lath Trust (hereinafter referred to as ' the assessee ') is a trust established by Shri Laxminarain Lath by a settlement deed (annexure D) dated August 25, 1948. By the said settlement deed, the settlor, Shr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1988Raj64; 1987(2)WLN538
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. This is a special appeal against the order of a learned single Judge (N. M. Kasliwal) in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1024 of 1984, decided on May 14, 1986 by which the writ petition has been partly allowed to the extent a concession was made by the respondent-Rajasthan State Electricity Board (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the R.S.E.B.'), but has been dismissed for the remaining part. The only relief granted to the petitioners on the basis of the concession made by the R.S.E.B. is a direction for proportionate reduction in the minimum charges claimed by the R.S.E.B. to the extent of the power cuts during the relevant billing month; revision of the bilk for payment of minimum charges on this basts; and refund, if any, due to the petitioners as a result of revision of the bills. The main grievance of the petitioners in the writ petition that Clause 16(c) of the agreement dt./-Dec.15, 1981 between petitioners and R.S.E.B., particulars of which are stated hereafter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1988(2)WLN674
Farooq Hasan, J.1. The aforesaid two appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 5-11-1985 passed by the Civil Judge, Jaipur District Jaipur (trial court) and the same are filed under Section 54 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953, (here in after for brevity, 'the Act'). Both these appeals are disposed of by one and single judgment as they are almost identical to each other.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the State of Rajasthan issued a notice under Section 4 of the Act on April 30, 1964 for acquisition of the lands for educational institutions. The declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made and the same had been published in the Rajasthan Patrika of August 6, 1964; in that declaration, the lands bearing Khasra No. 61 having its area as 43 bighas 15 biswas, Khasra No. 65 having its area as 64 bighas total area of which is 107 bighas & 15 biswas, situated in village Jhalana Doongar, Tehsil Sanganer, Distt. Jaipur have also been included and the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1987]67STC103(Raj)
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. The appellant, M/s. Centuary Ecka, Jodhpur, is a duly registered partnership firm under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, having its registered office at 182, Balniketan Road, Jodhpur, and its branch office at Pali. This firm is also registered as a dealer under the provisions of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter, for short, 'the Rajasthan Act') as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter, for short, 'the Central Act'). This firm is doing business in purchasing and selling of packing materials, that is, waterproof paper (bituminised paper), the PVC bags and poly propylene bags, etc., at Jodhpur as well as at Pali. During the financial year 1978-79, the appellant-firm effected sale of waterproof paper only worth Rs. 2,32,074.50 at its head office at Jodhpur and worth Rs. 25,757.10 at its branch office at Pali and it charged sales tax from the customers at 4 per cent treating them as packing material and deposited the tax amount a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1987WLN(UC)662
1. I have beard Mr. Mridul Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.2. This is a bail application which has been filed by Laxman Singh for his release on bail pending trial of Sessions case No. 36/85 pending against him, in which he has been charged for the offence under Sections 302, 449 and 458, IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. He moved before Sessions Court, Merta for the grant of bail but the Sessions Judge dismissed his application on 19th January, 1987. He has, therefore moved to this Court for grant of bail. The main contention of Mr. Mridul Jain is that charge had been framed against the petitioner by the Sessions Judge, Merta, on March 4, 1986 after the case had been committed to him by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Merta on 19th December, 1985. The occurrence took place on 11th August, 1984. The petitioner was arrested on 20th September, 1985. Prior to that petitioner was absconding for more than one year, charge-sheet was filed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1987(2)WLN47
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. Moiety of a shop situated near old Police Kotwali in Deogarh was owned by Shri Rikhab Dass and rest moiety was owned by Gulab Chand and his sons Tara Chand and Nemi Chand. Mohan Lal son of Harak Chand, deceased (and now represented by respondents Nos. 1/1 and 1/2) by way of Civil Suit No. 312 of 19 & 5 instituted on July 5, 1965 against the appellant and respondents Nos. 2 to 12 in the court of Munsif, Bheem, which was later on transferred to the Court of Munsif, Rajsamand, prayed for a decree of redemption and delivery of possession of the moiety of the shop as successor in interest of Rikhab Dass which was alleged to have been usufructuarily mortgaged by Rikhab Das and his sons with Gulab Chand and his sons Tara Chand and Nemi Chand on Miti Bhadva Budi 9 Samwat Year 1948 corresponding to the year 1891 AD Mohan Lal and respondent Nos. 2 to 9 were surviving legal representatives of the mortgagors. The appellant Nathu Lal and respondents Nos. 10, 11 and 12 are...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1988Raj105
ORDERKanta Bhatnagar, J. 1. The petitioners in all the writ petitions detailed in Schedule annexed with this order and forming part of it, in response to the advertisement by respondent 1, in the month of October 1986, inviting applications for admission to the General Nursing Course (for short 'the Course' hereinafter) in the State of Rajasthan submitted applications for being admitted to the Course at Barmer Centre. Not being selected for the course, the petitioners felt aggrieved and invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 2. Notices at the admission stage were issued to the respondents. Mr. L. S. Udawat, Additional Government Advocate appeared on their behalf. At the request of the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the urgency of the matter, the writ petitions have been heard for final disposal at the admission stage. As the points involved in all the writ petitions are common, I propose to dispose them of by one common order. 3. The facts relevant for the disposa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1987(2)WLN504
Dinker Lal Mehta, J.1. The judgment debtor has preferred this appeal against the order dated 19th August, 1975, passed by the learned District Judge, Tonk, in objection petition No. 32 of 1974, in execution case No. 8/1973.2. There was a litigation between the judgment debtor and the decree bolder. Compromise decree was passed. It was agreed upon that the decree holder will get interest from the judgment debtor at rate of 1.50 per cent per month from the date of the decree till the date of realisation.3. Objection petition was filed by a present judgment debtor in an execution petition & it was submitted that the Rajasthan Money Lenders Act, applied. It was further submitted that the provisions of Sections 27 & 29 of the said Act, come into play and the decree which has been passed by the court below is a nullity, as it has been passed against the provisions of the Money Lenders Act. It was also submitted that more than Rs. 85,000/- have been said.4. The admitted position in this case ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1987(2)WLN110
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. The petitioners in all the writ petitions detailed in Schedule annexed with this order and forming part of it, in response to the advertisement by respondent No. 1, in the month of Oct., 1986, inviting applications for admission to the General Nursing Course (for short 'the Course' here in after) in the State of Rajasthan submitted applications for being admitted to the Course at Barmer Centre. Not being selected for the Course, the petitioners felt aggrieved and invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court.2 Notices at the admission stage were issued to the respondents Mr. L.S. Udawat, Additional Government Advocate appeared on their behalf. On the request of the learned Counsel for the parties and in view of the urgency of the matter, the writ petitions have been heard for final disposal at the admission stage. As the points involved in all the writ petitions are common, 1 propose to dispose them of by common order.3 The facts relevant for the disposal of the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1988(2)WLN14
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. These appeals have been filed by the State of Rajasthan under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, against the judgment dated December 3, 1980 of the learned Single Judge of this Court, who has struck down Sub-section (9A) of Section 86 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1959 (here in after referred to as 'the Act').2. Sub-section (9A) of Section 86, confers on the State Government the power:(i) to transfer any member of the service, known as the Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad Service from one Panchayat Samiti to another Panchayat Samiti, whether within the District or outside it; and(ii) To stay the operation of or cancel, any order of transfer made under Sub-section (9) of the rules made there under.This Sub-section in Section 86 of the Act was inserted by the Rajasthan Panchayat Laws (Amendment) Act, 1966 which was published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated April 6, 1966. In exercise of the powers conferre...
Tag this Judgment!