Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Oct-29-2010
..... india. we have considered aforesaid argument also. before appreciating the argument of the petitioners, it is necessary to refer the objects for which the sebi act was enacted. it provides establishment of board to protect interest of the investors in securities and to promote development and to regulate the security market and ..... are passed by the courts, tribunals and quasi judicial authorities while exercising their inherent powers. in this case, such powers are contained in the sebi act itself. thus, mere passing of ex-parte interim order during pendency of the proceedings cannot mean elimination of principles of natural justice. the petitioners would be ..... failed to raise their objections before the board within the stipulated period and straightway approached this court. second proviso to section 11(4) of the sebi act does not eliminate principles of natural justice, rather it provides for an opportunity of hearing to the intermediaries or persons concerned. in the light of aforesaid .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Nov-24-2010
..... of rajasthan & another v. tajiander pal, reported in (2003) 6 tax update part 3 page no. 84 considered the provisions of section 78(10-a) of the act of 1994 and held that these provisions are not mandatory and only directory in nature. division bench further held that if all the required documents were available at the time ..... officer vide its order dated 31.10.2006 levied penalty under section 76(11) of the rajasthan value added tax act, 2003(hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 2003') for violation of provisions of section 76(2)(a) of the act of 2003. penalty order passed by the assessing officer was set aside by deputy commissioner (appeals) vide order ..... assessing officer.4. it is relevant to mention that provisions of section 76(11) of the act of 2003 are peri materia with the earlier provisions of section 78(10-a) of the rajasthan sales tax act, 1994(hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1994').5. learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that all the required documents .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Nov-27-2010
..... worth crores. however, the affidavits given by the chief secretary, state of rajasthan clarifies the position, thus we need not to makeobservation regarding the act of the official respondents.21. the writ petition is accordingly allowed holding that the private respondents are not in rightful possession of the property in question ..... above clearly shows that respondents challenged inclusion of structure in khasra no.77 while notification was issued under section 52(1) and 52(2) of uit act, 1959. thus, they knowing about the acquisition of the structure, challenged the same and now taking a contrary plea of exclusion of structure from acquisition ..... to acquire the land of ram bagh area and, thereafter, a gazette notification was issued under the provisions of rajasthan urban improvement trust act, 1959 (for short uit act of 1959). acquisition was challenged by brigadier bhawani singh (erstwhile ruler), gandhi grah nirman co-operative society and many other persons. acquisition proceedings .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Oct-21-2010
..... .10. hon'ble the apex court in assistant commercial taxes officer v. bajaj electricals limited (supra), considered the provisions of section 78(5) of the rajasthan sales tax act, 1994. the amendment made in section 78(5) on 22.03.2002 was also considered and it was held that expression person in charge of the goods under section ..... assessing officer during enquiry, however, the assessment order was set aside on the ground that before 22.03.2002, when amendment was made in section 78(5) of the act of 1994, penalty could not have been levied against owner of the goods and it could have been levied only against 'vehicle driver' or 'person in charge of the ..... be sent along with the goods.4. the assessing officer was not satisfied with the explanation furnished by the assessee and consequently, levied penalty under section 78(5) of the act @ 30%, amounting to rs.60,481/- vide order dated 30.06.1999. being aggrieved with the same, an appeal was preferred by the assessee, which was allowed by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Sep-24-2010
..... .f. 04/04/1994 was not admissible in terms of judgment of apex court in respect of sales made by assessees covered under rajasthan sales tax act and the act of shri choudhary was alleged to be of gross negligence, which was self same charge imputed against present petitioner, as well; and in case of ..... retrospective effect and that plea was accepted through out; in such circumstances, it can in no manner be held from material on record that the petitioner acted either negligently or recklessly while discharging his statutory duties as quasi judicial authority while passing order of assessment which was made subject matter of inquiry in instant ..... /03/1998. in absence whereof, there was no prima facie material available on record before the inquiry officer or disciplinary authority which may hold that petitioner acted negligently or recklessly while in exercise of quasi judicial powers or had omitted prescribed conditions necessary for exercise of quasi judicial powers. in the light of what .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Sep-29-2010
..... certainly partake the character of the legal liability of the insured employer to pay the compensation amount with due interest as imposed upon him under the compensation act. thus the principal amount as well as the interest made payable thereon would remain part and parcel of the legal liability of the insured to be ..... of and in the course of his employment. such an accident is also covered by the statutory coverage contemplated by section 147 of the motor vehicles act read with the identical provisions under the very contracts of insurance reflected by the policy which would make the insurance company liable to cover all such claims ..... respondents, has raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the present appeal before this court. according to the learned counsel, according to section 30 of the act, before an appeal can be filed, the insurance company is required to deposit the entire compensation amount including the interest before the learned commissioner. however, in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Dec-13-2010
..... has also been refunded and - in absence of holding of any shares of company jmel, it is neither creditor nor contributories as provided u/s 439 of companies act, 1956 ("co. act"); as such, has no right of hearing at the stage of admission of winding up petition. 5. at the cost of repetition, it is reiterated that it ..... either of applicants seeking impleadments that they are contributories and rightly so since for a contributory one has to fulfil conditions as provided u/s 439(4) of co. act, which indisputably are not meted out by either of applicants seeking impleadments. thus, contention advanced by counsel for applicant (genus) that they are creditors of the company on ..... persons having jural relationship with the company, either by reason of a concluded contract or quasi contract alone can be said to be covered u/s 439 of co. act.8. applicant-genus, as alleged, deposited certain payment of employees' dues as also of state government and mere making of payment of certain dues will not make .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Jul-13-2010
..... person of the deceased was inflicted by fists and kicks and, therefore, it cannot be inferred that there was any intention or even knowledge of the accused that their act was likely to cause death of the deceased. in these circumstances, we find that the finding of the learned trial court acquitting the accused persons of the charge under ..... the accused persons that they will cause the death by strangulation. to us it appears that all of a sudden any one of the accused throttled the deceased which act of one of the accused persons was not shared by the other and so in our opinion in the particular circumstances of this case a common intention cannot be ..... clear from the evidence on record that no weapon was used by the appellants against the deceased. we cannot find any intention or even knowledge to the accused that their act was likely to cause the death of the deceased. the conviction under sec. 302 ipc cannot, therefore, be sustained & it is altered to sec. 325 ipc........22. in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Nov-11-2010
..... /2009 on having purchased lease hold rights through respondent-6 (secured creditor) under securitisation & reconstruction of financial assets & enforcement of security interest act, 2002 (sarfaesi act), but has been dispossessed on 09/03/2010 pursuant to warrant of possession issued by the executing court, jhunjhunu on 05/03/2010 in ..... possession of lease holds rights over mukandgarh property was handed over to petitioner, who indisputably, as assignee of secured creditors (tfci) took possession under sarfaesi act, to which indisputably, neither respondents-2 to 4 nor the borrower/lessee (m/s cross country hotels) raised objection at any stage; and lease holds ..... would in no manner frustrate rights of petitioner for restoration of possession of mukandgarh property having been vested in its favour by virtue of sarfaesi act (supra) and accordingly it is held that the petitioner was unlawfully dispossessed through warrant of possession impugned herein. consequently, writ petition succeeds and is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
Decided on : Sep-03-2010
..... . copy of driving license and identification card of the deceased were recovered from the accused pratap singh on the basis of information given under section 27 of evidence act. necessary memos and site plan were prepared.5. during investigation, seized clothes of deceased, blood stained soil, and shoes etc. were sent for fsl and after ..... innocence lies upon the accused under such circumstances. it seems, therefore, to follow that whatever force a presumption arising under section 106 of the indian evidence act may have in civil or in less serous criminal cases, in a trial for murder it is extremely weak in comparison with the dominant presumption of innocence.46 ..... view of principles laid in musheer khan's case (supra), in a case of murder, only on the basis of presumption under section 106 of the evidence act, the finding of conviction cannot be arrived at because this presumption is extremely weak incomparison with the dominant presumption of innocence.48. in these circumstances, we find .....
Tag this Judgment!