Madhya Pradesh Court July 1979 Judgments
Radheshyam Agarwal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-1979
Reported in: AIR1980MP95
J.S. Verma, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's suit has been decreed to the extent of Rupees 33,955.50 Paise, with interest, only against the defendants Nos. 3 to 6 and it has been dismissed in its entirety against defendants 1, 2, 7 and 8. The plaintiff in this appeal prays for passing the decree against defendants 1 and 2 (respondents 1 and 2) also but no such prayer has been made against defendants 7 and 8 who have not even been impleaded as parties. Thus the only question in this appeal is whether the suit can be decreed also against defendants Nos. 1 and 2.2. The plaintiff Radheshyam Agarwal is a businessman carrying on business in oil and other commodities at Jabalpur, Defendants 1 and 2 are the Central Railway and Southern Railway administrations. The defendant No. 3 is a partnership firm carrying on business in coconut oil at Alwaye in the State of Kerala, Defendants 4 to 6 are the partners of this firm and they are brothers. Defendants 7 and 8 are two ban...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhartiya Bhandar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1979
Reported in: (1979)13CTR(MP)159; [1980]122ITR622(MP); 1980MPLJ202
G.P. Singh, C.J.1. This is a reference under section 256 of the I.T. Act, 1961, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, referring for our answer the following question of law : ' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the surrender of the cash credits by the assessee, by including the amount of such credits in its total income while filing the return of income, did not amount to an admission of concealment of income by the assessee (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that even in such cases of surrender by an assessee of such cash credits as its income, the department had to prove by independent evidence that such amounts represented the concealed income of the assessee (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the penalty imposed on the assessee? '2. The facts are that the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Narsingh Vs. Kamandas and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1979
Reported in: AIR1980MP37
U.N. Bhachawat, J.1. The reference to this Bench arises out of the execution proceedings pending in the Court of the III Civil Judge, Class II, Chhindwara, in Execution Case No. 165-A of 1969, which was initiated on the application of the decree-holder-respondents for the execution of their money decree against the judgment-debtor-appellant. The reference has arisen in the following manner.2. An electric motor pump belonging to the judgment-debtor, which has been fitted in his well, situated in agricultural field for irrigating the field, and his cart have been attached on the application of the decree-holders-respondents by the said Executing Court. The judgment-debtor filed an objection to this attachment submitting that he was an agriculturist and the attached articles are the implements of husbandry which are necessary to enable him to carry on his agricultural operation and earn livelihood and as such the articles were exempted from attachment under proviso (b) to Sub-section (1) ...
Tag this Judgment!Kalooram Govindram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1979
Reported in: [1990]125ITR89(MP)
Sohani, J. 1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.C.Cs. Nos. 231 to 235 and 258, all of 1976. 2. These are applications under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter called the Act. 3. The material facts giving rise to these applications briefly are as follows: The assessee is an HUF deriving income from money-lending and other sources. In the course of assessment proceedings, certain payments made by the assessee by way of interest were allowed by the ITO. Subsequently, in the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1960-61, the ITO enquired into the genuineness of the payment of interest made by the assessee to Smt. Kamlabai, Smt. Indramani, Smt. Padmabai and Smt. Savitribai, to whom gifts were alleged to have been made by the assessee but as the moneys remained in deposit with the assessee, interest was being paid to them. The ITO held that these gifts were sham transactions and disallowed the payment of interest made thereon. On the basis...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Samrathmal Santoshchand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1979
Reported in: [1980]124ITR297(MP)
Sohani, J.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, has referred the following question of law to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the acceptance of the voluntary disclosure petitions under Section 24 of the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1965 and the payment of tax thereon by the creditors would, in law, justify the deletion of the amount of Rs. 20,500 and the interest of Rs. 1,140 from the assessment of the assessee who was not the declarant?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows I The assessee, Samrathmal Santoshchand, is a HUF and the assessment year in question is 1967-68. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ITO found credits in the names of the following parties in the books of the assessee:Name of the party Rs.1.Smt. Chandrakantibai w/o Shri Samrathmal5,0002.Ku. Vimal ...
Tag this Judgment!V.G. Sumant Vs. Shailendra Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-1979
Reported in: AIR1980MP101; 1979MPLJ785
J.S. Verma, J.1. This is an appeal by the claimant under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act against the order dated 27-3-1974 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal, in Misc. Civil Case No. 19 of 1967, rejecting the entire claim arising out of a motor accident. The Tribunal has, however, held that in ease the claimant was entitled to the award of any compensation, the amount of Rs. 5,000 would be adequate compensation in its view.2. On 16-1-1967, the claimant V.G. Sumant who was posted as Post Master at Balaghat, happened to be in Bhopal. That day In the evening while he was in the market for making some purchases from a hardware shop in Jumerati Mohalla, Bhopal, and happened to be sitting on a stool outside the shop, a jeep car MPB 2844 owned by respondent No. 2 Shivnarayan Seth was parked at some distance from where he was sitting. Respondent No. 1 Shailendra Kumar, a minor son of respondent No. 2, was alleged to have driven the jeep negligently as a result of whic...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Diwansingh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-06-1979
Reported in: 1980CriLJ760
ORDERJ.P. Bajpai, J.1. This revision is at the instance of the two accused-applicants who seek to challenge their conviction for the offence punishable under Section 382 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 700/- each in default of payment of which to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for nine months each.2. The facts giving rise to the prosecution are as below:Ranjit Singh, the complainant, was going to his mother-in-law's place in village Barahet for bringing her. He was riding on a mare. When he reached by the side of the river, the two accused persons who were having sticks fixed with iron spears forcibly took the mare away from him and asked him to tell his master that he may take back the mare from the village of the accused persons. It was also suggested that there was some ill-will between the accused Dewansingh and Babusingh in the context of breakdown of the negotiations of marriage of Babu Singh's son with the daugh...
Tag this Judgment!MatadIn Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1979
Reported in: 1980CriLJ186
ORDERJ.P. Bajpai, J.1. If 'A' holding a gunny bag comes out of his house with 'B' and requests 'B' to hold the gunny bag for a while so that he may close the doors and put a lock and 'B' in compliance with his request holds the gunny bag so as to enable 'A' to close and lock the doors, can it be said that 'B' acquired possession of the incriminating articles, if any, found in the bag? In my opinion, the answer will be in the negative, unless there is something more to show that 'B' was conscious and aware of the incriminating articles and that he had control over the same so as to regulate its use, custody or manner of disposal. Therefore, in the meanwhile, if police officers appear on spot and recover the gunny bag from 'B', while he was holding the same for enabling 'A' to lock the doors of his house, and the bag is found to contain arms and ammunition, 'B' could not be held liable for the offence punishable under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act for acquiring or possessing arms with...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›