Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Sep-18-1995
Reported in : AIR1996Raj162; 1996(1)WLC261
..... like things. no such allegations against the appellant have been made by smt. chandrawati or her witnesses that he, in any way, by his character, conduct or acts, disentitled himself for the custody of the child. the only allegation made by chandrawati against the appellant is that he is living separately and being employed as a ..... not made himself unfit to be the guardian. in dealing with the application for the custody of the minor under section 25 of the guardians and wards act, the first and paramount consideration is the welfare of the minor and all other considerations are subsidiary and subordinate and should have importance proportionate to their bearings ..... appellant-husband has preferred this civil miscellaneous appeal. 4. it is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that (i) under the hindu minority and guardians act, the natural guardian of the minor boy up to the age of five years is his mother and thereafter his father and in these circumstances the appellant could .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-12-1995
Reported in : AIR1996Raj40; 1996(1)WLC36
..... had actually put down their signatures before the executant and thus, could not be termed as attesting witnesses as per the requirement of section 63(c) of the indian succession act which will be noticed hereunder:--'(c) the will shall be attested by two or more witnesses, each of whom has seen the testator sign or affix his mark to the ..... true to say that the will has to be proved like any other document except as to the special requirements of attestation prescribed by section 63 of the indian succession act. as in the case of proof of other documents so in the case of proof of wills it would be idle to expect proof with mathematical certainty. the test to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : May-12-1995
Reported in : I(1996)DMC212; 1996(1)WLC305; 1995(1)WLN690
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. Petitioner Deepak Kumar Goyal aggrieved by the order dated 14.4.1995 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar cancelling his bail under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C and directing him to surrender himself before the learned A.C.J.M. on 18.4.1995 and further directing the said Magistrate to send him to the judicial custody, has preferred this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing S.B. Cr. Misc. Application No. 202/95 and anticipatory bail application Under Section 438 Cr.P.C. bearing S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 699/95.2. Since both these petitions emanate from the impugned order, those are being disposed off by a common order.3. Now briefly the skeletal facts. Deceased Saroj Bala was married on 7.5.1994 to the petitioner and she died on the night intervening 1st and 2nd December, 1995 at petitioner's house in abnormal circumstances. Initially, an enquiry Under Section 176 Cr.P.C. was conducted by the City Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar. The Medical Boa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-06-1995
Reported in : 1996CriLJ340
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J.1. This jail appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 9-1-95 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Hanumangarh whereby he convicted the appellant for the offences Under Sections 457 and 324 IPC and sentenced him to R. I. for one year and a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to further undergo R. I. for fifteen days on each count and further directed that both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.2. Briefly the relevant facts for disposal of this appeal are that on the night intervening 29th Feb. and 1st March, 1992, PW 1 Smt. Guddi aged about 28 years was sleeping in her parents' house. Her niece PW 2 Kumari India aged about 13 years was also sleeping in the same room. It is alleged that at about 10-11 PM, Smt. Guddi was awakened and found that her cousin, appellant Rajendra, who had a knife in his hand, entered into her room, switched off the light and with an intention to commit rape with her, fell over her. She raised alarm and Indra was a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Oct-11-1995
Reported in : (1996)IILLJ262Raj; 1996(1)WLC761
..... 7, 1980 refused to refer the dispute for adjudication to the tribunal as according to the centra) government, bal kishan gupta does not fall within the category of 'workman' as defined in the industrial disputes act, 1947 (for short 'the act1). dissatisfied with the order dated january 7, 1980 passed by the ..... central government refusing to make a reference to the tribunal, appellant - petition bal kishan gupta filed the writ petition before this court which was ..... the discretion and expertise and ensure that me adjudicating authority has performed its function of considering the relevant factors. it prevents the adjudicating authority also to act arbitrarily. the reasons can, also disclose the correctable deficiencies in the order and facilitate the judicial review. the central government, while refusing to make reference .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : May-22-1995
Reported in : 1995CriLJ3356; 1995(2)WLN232
..... be said that the customs officer could not have formed a reasonable belief to the effect that the goods were liable to be confiscated under section. 113, customs act, 1962. there was sufficient material to form this reasonable belief. therefore, reliance placed on the decision of the supreme court in the case of malkiat singh, : ..... . the reported decision of the supreme court (malkiat singh's case, : 1970crilj750 , (supra), on which reliance is placed, was a case under the essential commodities act, 1955 and the allegation was that certain provisions of punjab paddy (export control) order, 1959 were contravened. in this case, the approach of the court has to ..... petitioners had alternate remedy for reply to the show cause notice and agitating the case before the authorities exercising powers under the appropriate provisions of the customs act, 1962. the disputed questions of fact were involved in the petition and the notice was issued within the powers of the customs officer. 8. the learned .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : May-08-1995
Reported in : [1996]218ITR50(Raj)
..... 1989 sc 100. in the aforesaid decision, the constitutional validity of the provision of the rajasthan court-fees and suits valuation act and that of the karnataka court-fees and suits valuation act as well as that of the bombay court-fees act came up for consideration. the supreme court has in paras. 30 and 31, inter alia, observed as follows (headnote) :'though ..... 1. the petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of the amended provision of section 253(6) of the income-tax act, 1961, which has been brought into force by the finance act, 1992, with effect from june 1, 1992. the aforesaid provision deals with payment of court fee in respect of the appeal before the income-tax appellate tribunal. the fee prescribed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-13-1995
Reported in : 1996CriLJ845; 1996WLC(Raj)UC459
..... placed before me.10. in such circumstances prima facie possession of one litre of acetic anhydride itself does not appear to be an offence punishable under the act. the 1.0. has not collected any evidence to establish that the petitioner bheru lal supplied the acetic anhydride to the co-accused.11. therefore, ..... , 1993 has declared acetic anhydride as a controlled substance under the act. the central government being of the opinion that having regard to the use of the controlled substances in the production or manufacture of any narcotic drug or ..... ground that the petitioner had supplied the acetic anhydride to the co-accused persons, who were involved in manufacturing of brown sugar.5. section 9a of the act deals with the power to control and regulate controlled substance. the ministry of finance department (revenue) narcotic drugs control bureau vide its notification dated 24th march .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-24-1995
Reported in : (1997)IIILLJ449Raj; 1996(2)WLC549
..... applicable to the facts of present case. in the case reported in (1987-i-llj-545), the apex court has held that under section 4 of the act of 1959, the employers are not bound to appoint only the persons sponsored by the employment exchanges. they are only obliged to invite applications. the petitioners are ..... n. haragopal v. tirumala tirupati devasthanam and 1992 (3) slr 647 g. ramesh v. deputy director.3. counsel for the petitioners submits that section 4 of the act of 1959 speaks that the vacancies should be notified to the employment exchanges. it does not mean that the list of candidates be invited from the employment exchanges. his ..... petition, the respondents have stated that the parliament has enacted the employment exchanges (compulsory notification of vacancies) act, 1959 (for short 'the act of 1959'). section 4 of the act of 1959 provides that after the commencement of the said act in any state or area thereof, the employer in every establishment in public sector in that state or .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-03-1995
Reported in : 1996CriLJ2591; I(1996)DMC359; 1996(1)WLC274
..... the parents i.e. complainant and petitioner no. 1 at the time of birth of the female child.18. it is well to remember that section 112 of indian evidence act has application where paternity of a child is in dispute. here in the present case, the accused-petitioners are indirectly disputing the paternity of the female child on the ground .....
Tag this Judgment!