Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1985]58CompCas805(Raj); 1983()WLN400
M.C. Jain, J.1. The petitioner has moved this petition for seeking direction under Section 163 read with Section 209(4) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act'), for allowing immediate inspection of the records specified in those provisions. The petitioner is an existing director and a shareholder of the Lake Palace Hotels and Motels Pvt. Ltd. and in his capacity as such has sought this direction. This court issued notices to the respondents. The respondents have appeared before this court, but have not submitted any reply to the petition and the learned counsel for the respondents have raised certain contentions before me with regard to the maintainability of the petition.2. Mr. L. R. Mehta, learned counsel for respondents Nos. 1 and 2, and Mr. N. N. Mathur, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, have submitted that for seeking any relief under Section 163 as well as under Section 209(4) of the Act, this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this petition. Re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR2002Raj109; 2002(2)WLC182
Madam, J.1. Shorn in details the facts giving rise to this second appeal are that Sajjan Raj Surana (plaintiff appellant) instituted a civil suit for permanent injunction with the averments inter alia that he has been practicing advocate not only in the subordinate courts but also before this Court; he had taken electric connection from erstwhile Rajasthan State Electricity Board (RSEB) (now substituted as Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Jaipur) bearing Account No. 28A/112-4 Zone III for his rented premises in a residential building known as Rahim Manzll, M.I. Road Jaipur, where his office cum chamber is established. His case in the plaint was that being an advocate by his profession he is not indulged in any commercial activities to the suit premises but the defendant (RSEB) charged for electric connection to his chamber as a commercial establishment whereas at that time, domestic charges was 59P. as against commercial one at Rs. 1.05, per unit.2. In written statement, the defendant (...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1988Raj7; 1987(2)WLN901
G.M. Lodha, J. 1. 'Rape' or 'Slap' on preamble -- Justice social economic is the question? Honey Moon-Grave Yard Valued at 500/- doll, and that too, -- kindness and charity of Socialist State. Let us now read Ex. 9.'The boat tragedy which took place in Nakki Lake at Mount Abu on 22nd April, 1973, has shocked us all. It is a great misfortune that Shri Girish Roopani and Shrimati Rashmi w/o Shri Girish Roopani, members of your family, were the victims of this tragedy. The Chief Minister of Rajasthan, Shri Barkatullah Khan, has expressed his concern over this mishap and has desired me to convey his heartfelt condolences to you and the entire bereaved family. He has also kindly sanctioned ex-gratia grant of Rs. 500/-to each of the family of the deceased as a token of deep sympathy to the bereaved family. Accordingly I am enclosing herewith a Demand Draft amounting to Rs. 1,000/-(Rupees One Thousand) only for the same. Kindly acknowledge receipt. Yours faithfully,Sd/-(J. M. KHAN)' 2. In Ama...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995CriLJ2050; 1995(1)WLC713
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 1-5-1993 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Cases, Dungarpur, whereby he convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 354, IPC and sentenced him to undergo six month's simple imprisonment.2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that on 25-4-1990, when prosecutrix P.W. 2 Kumari Kalawati D/o Ram Charan, H.C., S.P. Office, Dungarpur was returning from the house of her mother's sister (Mausi), her neighbours Raju Dhobi and Ajay took her in a hut and committed rape with her. Thereafter they took her in an abandoned house situated in the Housing Board Colony, Dungarpur, where she was kept till 27th April, 1990, and repeatedly committed rape with her. On 27-4-1990, P.W, 1 Ram Charan, Head Constable, while searching her daughter in the Housing Board Colony, heard her screams. At that time he was accompanied by Laxman Katara, Jivat Ram and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1990Raj34; 1989(2)WLN63
Sharma, J.1. In this public interest litigation relating to functioning of the S.M.S. Hospital Jaipur and other government hospitals in Rajasthan, more so, in respect of various commissions and omissions by various functionaries therein, the petitioner, who is a freedom fighter and has been active in and has very long association with the Sarvodaya Movement and claims to believe in the Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi, the father of the Nation, seeks from this court direction that a Commission of Inquiry under the provisions of Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (for short the Act), be set up by the State of Rajasthan to find out and identify the guilty persons responsible for the various incidents of deaths and other sufferings. We will at the latter stage of this order deal with the question as to whether this Court can order the State Government to set up a Commission of Inquiries under the provisions of the Act, but for the present we will give few facts as alleged in this writ petition,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1999Raj13; 1999(2)WLC195
ORDERB.S. Chauhan, J.1. All the aforesaid petitions are inter-connected and there is an order of the Court to hear all these petitions together. Thus, they are being disposed of by the common judgment. To dispose of all these three petitions, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1031/1998 is taken as the leading case for the reason that all the relevant documents and orders of all the three cases have been filed therein.2. The respondent No. 1, Bikaner Sahkari Upbhokta Bhandar, hereinafter called 'the Bhandar', is a Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') and the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred as 'the Rules'). The management committee of the respondent No. 1, which is headed by the elected Chairman, resolved to instal a statue of its earlier Chairman late (Shri) Vijay Singh in the premises of the respondent No. 1 -- the Bhandar, vide Resolution dated 7-12-94, ju...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1998)IIILLJ457Raj; 1994(2)WLC382
G.S. Singhvi, J. 1. Petitioner has prayed for quashing of order dated December 30, 1993 issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Jaipur (West) by which the service of the petitioner has been terminated as a measure of retrenchment. He has also prayed that the respondents be directed to treat him as semi-permanent Cattle Guard in the Department.2. Facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass. According to the petitioner, he had 1 joined service as Cattle Guard on being appointed as such in Jaipur Range of the Forest Department with effect from May 16, 1989 under the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Combined Plantation Project, Jaipur West, Jaipur. From the date of his appointment, the petitioner continuously served the Department till the issue of order dated December 30, 1993 (Annexure-II) retrenching the petitioner from service by paying him pay in lieu of one month's notice and retrenchment compensation for the service rendered by him.3. The petitioner has pleaded that after having...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (2004)191CTR(Raj)303; [2005]277ITR166(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J. 1. This reference is made under Section 256 of the IT Act, 1961, by the Tribunal, Jaipur. It relates to asst. yr. 1986-87. The following questions have been referred to this Court for its decision :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in holding that income from Sikkim State Lottery is taxable under the IT Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that deduction under Section 80TT is applicable on the net winning amount received by the assessee and not on the gross amount of the winning prize ?'2. The facts found by the Tribunal ate that the assessee is a resident Indian citizen earning income from business and property, at Jaipur, Rajasthan. He won the first prize of Rs. 20 lakhs in the 287th bumper draw of the Sikkim State Lottery, held on 20th Feb., 1986 at Gangtok by the Director, State Lotteries, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok, After h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995CriLJ1376; 1995(2)WLC730
ORDERR.R. Yadav, J.1. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order passed by the learned City Magistrate, Udaipur under Sub-section (1) of Section 145, Cr. P.C. and order passed by him attaching the Moiyatpura Mosque under Sub-section (1) of Section 146, Cr. P.C. Learned City Magistrate passed the impugned preliminary order under Sub-section (1) of Section 145, Cr. PC on 29-5-84 and subsequent thereafter he passed another order of attachment under Sub-section (1) of Section 146, Cr. PC on the ground of Emergency attaching Moiyatpura Mosque on 30-5-84. Both the orders mentioned-above passed by the learned City Magistrate, Udaipur are under challenge before me.2. Before entering into the merit of the present revision petition, it would be expedient to make mention that a preliminary objection has been raised about the maintainability of the present revision petition filed by the petitioner.3. Mr. V. R. Mehta, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, urged before me that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2397
Goyal, J.1. All these misc. appeals under Section 22 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (in short the Act) have been preferred by the various tenants against the order dated 25.8, 2003 whereby learned Additional District Judge No, 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur determined the provisional rent under Section 7 of the Act.2. The landlord-respondent is the same in all these appeals and all the shops in question are located in the same building known as Saraogi Mansion, M.I. Road, Jaipur and the facts as well as law points involved in all these appeals are common, hence these appeals are being disposed of vide common judgment.3. The facts of each case in brief are as under :-C.M.A. No. 2384/2003:-Shop No. 41 of 117 sq.ft. area on ground floor was let-out on 30.11.1985 at monthly rent of Rs. 478/- including Rs, 28/- as house tax. The rent was enhanced to Rs. 585/- per month including Rs. 35/- as house tax w.e.f. 1.4.1996. The plaintiff-landlord filed a suit for fixation...
Tag this Judgment!