1
Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Dec-19-2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :ORDER: (1) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.7/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (2) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.18/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (3) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.19/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (4) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.20/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (5) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.21/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (6) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.22/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara Date of Order :: 19th December, 2013 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.Vikas Balia ) Mr.Pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Dec-19-2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :ORDER: (1) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.7/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (2) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.18/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (3) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.19/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (4) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.20/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (5) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.21/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara (6) S.B.CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.22/2012 A Infrastructure Ltd., Bhilwara versus Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Bhilwara Date of Order :: 19th December, 2013 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.Vikas Balia ) Mr.Pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Dec-06-2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :ORDER: S.B. CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.197/2012 Bhanwar lal Vs. Ram Avtar Date of Order ::06. h December, 2013 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr. Manoj Bhandari, for the petitioner. Mr. C.P. Soni, for the respondent. ---- BY THE COURT: This revision petition under Section 115 CPC is directed against order dated 24.09.2012 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Merta City, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed. The facts in brief may be noticed thus: the plaintiff Ram Avatar filed a suit for eviction, arrears of rent and mesne profit against the petition-defendant after complying with the requirements of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 ('the T.P. Act'); an application under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC was filed by the petitioner on 14.09.2011, inter alia, with the averments that earlier an application was filed under Order VII, R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Nov-28-2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :JUDGMENT: S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.394/2000 Chananmal Vs. Bimla Date of Judgment ::28. h November, 2013 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr. Nitin Trivedi, for the appellant. Mr. Sunil Beniwal, for the respondent. ---- BY THE COURT: This appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('the Act') is directed against judgment and decree dated 27.05.2000 passed by the Additional District Judge, Nohar, District Hanumangarh, whereby, the petition presented by the appellant seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce has been rejected. Brief facts of the case may be noticed thus: the appellant- petitioner filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act without specifying any clause of the said section, inter alia, with the averments that marriage between the parties was solemnized on 14.07.1978 and, on the next day of the marriage, which was solemnized at her village, she came to her in-laws' place and st...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Nov-08-2013
1/43 S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8609/2013 S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8610/2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8609/2013 SHIVA @ SAVARAM VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8610/2013 SANCHITA GUPTA @ SHILPI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN DATE OF ORDER :08. 11.2013 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Mr. Mahesh Bora, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Nishant Bora, for the petitioners. Mr. Anand Purohit, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, for the State. Mr. Manish Vyas & Kapil Purohit, for the complainant. ***** Today, S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8609/2013 preferred by Shiva @ Savaram and S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8610/2013 instituted by Sanchita Gupta @ Shilpi are listed. Both the petitioners have been named as accused in case FIR No.122/2013 registered at Women Police Station, Jodhpur (West), Jodhpur corresponding to FIR No.0/13 reg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Nov-08-2013
1/43 S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8609/2013 S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8610/2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8609/2013 SHIVA @ SAVARAM VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.8610/2013 SANCHITA GUPTA @ SHILPI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN DATE OF ORDER :08. 11.2013 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Mr. Mahesh Bora, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Nishant Bora, for the petitioners. Mr. Anand Purohit, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, for the State. Mr. Manish Vyas & Kapil Purohit, for the complainant. ***** Today, S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8609/2013 preferred by Shiva @ Savaram and S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8610/2013 instituted by Sanchita Gupta @ Shilpi are listed. Both the petitioners have been named as accused in case FIR No.122/2013 registered at Women Police Station, Jodhpur (West), Jodhpur corresponding to FIR No.0/13 reg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Oct-30-2013
SMT. SABANA @ CHAND BAI & ANR. VS. MOHD. TALIB ALI & ANR. (S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.362/2011) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER SMT. SABANA @ CHAND BAI & ANR. VS. MOHD. TALIB ALI & ANR. (S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.362/2011) Dated:- 30th October, 2013 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AMITAVA ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr. D.N.Yadav } Ms. Purnima Yadav } for the petitioners. Mr. N.K.Bohra } for the respondent. Mr. S.D.Purohit } Mr. Amit Sharma } Mr. D.S.Beniwal } Mr. M.K.Trivedi } Mr. Anuj Kala }Counsel assisting the Court. BY THE COURT:( PER HON'BLE MR. SANGEET LODHA,J.) Reportable 1. The legal question that falls for our determination in this reference made by the learned Single Judge of this Court reads as follows: Whether the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 can be applied retrospectively specially where the aggrieved party (wife) was divorced by the respondent (husband) prior to the Act coming into force on Oc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Oct-29-2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5993/2007 Shri Sanwaliya J.Mandir Mandal versus Badri Lal Sharma Anr. Date of Order : 29.10.2013 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Mr.B.R.Mehta for petitioner. Mr.A.K.Rajvanshy for respondents. BY THE COURT:- This writ petition is directed against the award dated 15.12.2006 passed by the Labour Court, Bhilwara holding therein that the retrenchment of the workman effected by the employer was in violation of the mandatory condition precedent for a valid retrenchment as prescribed under Section 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Accordingly, the Labour Court ordered for reinstatement of the workman with continuity in service with 50% of the total back wages. Learned counsel for the parties have stated that similar writ petition preferred by the petitioner against the award passed by the learned Labour Court in the cases of other workmen has already been dismissed 2 vide judgment dat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Oct-24-2013
S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5182/2013 Smt. Kaushalya Devi & Anr. versus Abdul Rahoof Khan 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5182/2013 Smt. Kaushalya Devi & Anr. versus Abdul Rahoof Khan Date of Order : 24.10.2013 PRESENT HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Mr Bhawani Singh, for petitioners Mr V.N.Kalla, for he respondent BY THE COURT: This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 22.04.2013 passed by Civil Judge (Jr.Division).Chittorgarh (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter) in Case No.37/2009, whereby the learned trial court has rejected the applications preferred by the petitioners under Order 6 Rule 17 read with section 151 CPC for seeking necessary amendments in the written statement and under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) read with section 151 CPC for producing a registered sale-deed dated 04.06.2004 on record. Brief facts of the case are that the S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5182/2013 Smt. Kaushalya D...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Oct-18-2013
D.B.OTHER TAX REFERENCE No.24/2004. M/s Shree Shyam Filaments versus CCE, Jaipur // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. :: ORDER :: M/s Shree Shyam Filaments versus CCE, Jaipur D.B.OTHER TAX REFERENCE No.24/2004. Date of Order :: 18th October 2013 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE V.K.MATHUR Mr.Ramit Mehta ].Mr.Pradhyumn Singh ]., for the petitioner. Mr.Siddharth Tatiya for Mr.Ravi Bhansali, for the respondents..BY THE COURT: In compliance of the order dated 14.10.2003 passed by this Court in D.B.Central Excise Reference Application No.16/2003 under Section 35H of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act).the CustoMs.Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (the Tribunal) has referred the following questions for decision of this Court alongwith the statement of case:- (1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the CEGAT was right and justified in rejecting the petitioner's refund claim as time barred.....
Tag this Judgment!