Madhya Pradesh Court November 1982 Judgments
Allied Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd., Durg Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, Bho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1982
Reported in: AIR1983MP158
G. P. Singh, C. J.1. By order, dated 13th February 1979, M/s. Allied Industries Corporation, which was then a proprietary concern, was selected for establishing Solvent Extraction Plant for certain areas of Madhya Pradesh. This selection was made subject to three conditions. The first condition required the deposit of Rs. 20,000/- as earnest money. The second condition was that the plant will be established within a period of 18 months and in case of default, the State will have the liberty to forfeit the earnest money. The third condition was that the party will have to enter into a contract with the Forest Department for supply of raw material, meaning thereby sal seeds, on terms as may be approved by the Government. M/s. Allied Industries Corporation which, as earlier mentioned, was a proprietary concern was later on registered as a private Limited Company which is the petitioner in this petition. An application was made on behalf of the petitioner for substitution of its name in th...
Tag this Judgment!Kaniram and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1982
Reported in: AIR1983MP86
G.G. Sohani, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The material facts giving rise to this petition briefly are as follows:--The petitioners are residents of District Mandsaur in the State of Madhya Pradesh and carry on the business of breeding and selling camels, which business, according to the petitioners, is their only source of livelihood. The petitioners were being granted licences for grazing their camels in the forest in accordance with the Madhya Pradesh Grazing Rules, 1979, framed by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred by Section 76 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. For the year 1982, the applications of the petitioners for grant of grazing licences were, however, not accepted by the respondents on the ground that there was an order issued by the State Government discontinuing the practice of granting grazing licences in the current year. The petitioners contend that the respondents have no authority to impose a total ban on grazing o...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammed Shareef and ors. Vs. Bashir Ahmed and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1983MP44
J.S. Verma, J.1. This revision first came up for hearing before a single Bench, where correctness of two single Bench decisions in Civil Revision No. 145 of 1981 (Indore Bench) decided on 2-5-1981 : (Reported in AIR 1982 NOC 66), Jainarayan Shukla v. Gyansingh and Civil Revision No. 212 of 1981, decided on 31-3-1981, Raghubirdayal v. T. Krishnaswami arose for examination, on the ground that they are contrary to the Full Bench decision in Usha Jain v. Manmohan Bajaj, 1980 MPLJ 623: AIR 1080 Madh Pra 146. Accordingly, the matter was referred by the single Bench to a Division Bench for decision and this is how this revision comes up before us.2. The material facts are these: Respondent No. 1 Bashir Ahmed Choudhary obtained a decree against the remaining respondents for their eviction from an immovable property situate in Jabalpur. The petitioners, who are closely related to the judgment-debtors, resisted execution of that decree and made an application in the executing Court under Order 2...
Tag this Judgment!Leelabai and ors. Vs. Mahavir Prasad and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-04-1982
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC18
G P. Singh, C.J. 1. This is an appeal against an award dated 28th November, 1979 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.2. Sharda Prasad who was a milk vendor died in a motor accident on 27th May 1978. The appellants who are widow, children and parents the Tribunal. The Tribunal has allowed Rs. 8,000/- as compensation to the appellants. The appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement of the award.3. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that the driver of the motor vehicle was negligent. There is no cross appeal. The finding, therefore, has to be accepted for decision of this appeal. The Tribunal has also found that the deceased was earning Rs. 225/- per month. The Tribunal has further held that the deceased must have been spending Rs. 100/- per month on his family and the rest on himself We accept the finding that the deceased was earning Rs. 225/- per month. However, having regard to the number of members of the family, we are of opinion that the deceased must have been spen...
Tag this Judgment!Auto Sales (Bombay) Vs. the Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1982
Reported in: [1983]54STC320(MP)
R.K. Vijayvargiya, J.1. By this application under Section 44(2) of M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Rules made thereunder, the applicant has prayed that the Board of Revenue be directed to state a case and refer the questions of law mentioned in paragraph 13 of the application arising out of the order of the Board in Sales Tax Appeal No. 322-PBR/77 for the opinion of this Court.2. The facts giving rise to this application briefly stated are as follows : The applicant carries on business in motor parts, fuel injection pumps, white metal, etc. The applicant was assessed to tax under the Act for the financial year 1970-71. The gross turnover as per books of the dealer was Rs. 3,73,969. The Flying Squad had inspected the business of the dealer and recommended an enhancement of Rs. 10,00,000 in his turnover. The manager of the assessee-firm Shri Chopra had furnished certain loose papers and two diaries to the Flying Squad which contained notes ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›