Madhya Pradesh Court July 1983 Judgments
Lakhmichand Vs. Mitthu and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1983
Reported in: AIR1984MP112
ORDERG.P. Singh, C.J. 1. The facts leading to this revision are that the applicant in this revision instituted a suit against the non-applicant for recovery of Rs. 1895/- on 24-8-1976. The trial Court dismissed the suit on 28th June, 1978. The applicant then preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Sagar, being Civil Appeal No. 23-B of I97S, which was dismissed by the judgment and decree dated 25-11-1981 on the ground that it was not maintainable under Section 96, C. P. C. as amended by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976, for the reason that there was no question of law involved in the appeal. It is this judgment of the Additional District Judge which is challenged in this revision by the plaintiff,2. The argument of the learned counsel for the plaintiff is that the suit was institutedbefore the coming into force of the Amendment Act of 1976 and that the right to prefer an appeal in accordance with, unamended Section 96 accrued to the plaintiff on the da...
Tag this Judgment!Komal Das Baghel Vs. Maqsood Khan @ Pappu Seth and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1983
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC46
Gulab Gupta, J. 1. Heard Shri R.R. Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the applicant, on the question of admission.2. The first grievance of the learned Counsel is that the Commissioner his neither awarded any penalty or interest on the amount of compensation determined by him. He submits that when some compensation has been awarded, penalty and interest should also be awarded. This does not appear to be correct. It is in the discretion of the commission to awarded penalty or interest while awarding the compensation. Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act does not contemplate an appeal against orders refusing to award interest or penalty. Section 30(1)(aa) provides for an appeal against an order awarding interest or penalty under Section 4A. In this view of the matter, the appeal on this question would not be maintainable.3. The learned Counsel's next grievance is about ignoring evidence on the wages which the workman was earning. He submits that it has come on record that besides Rs. 1...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bhandari Crosfields Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-1983
Reported in: [1985]60STC353(MP)
ORDERR.K. Vijayavargiya, J. 1. This order shall also dispose of Misc. Civil Case No. 227 of 1982 (Commissioner of Sales Tax, M. P. v. Bhandari Crosfields Ltd., Indore).2. By these references under Section 44(1) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act') the Board of M. P., Gwalior has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court:Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, where the dealer made in the returns an untenable claim for deduction in respect of sales of cattle feed and poultry feed, when such a claim had already been rejected by the assessing authority in respect of assessment for the year 1965-66 the returns furnished by the dealer can be said to be false returns so as to attract penalty under Section 43(1) of the Act? 3. The material facts giving rise to these references are as follows : The assessee was assessed to sales tax under the Act as also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the period 1st January, 1971 to...
Tag this Judgment!The Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd., Sehore (M.P.) and anr. Vs. the State ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1983
Reported in: AIR1984MP34
Oza, J.1. This is a petition filed by the petitioners challenging the order of the Transport Commissioner, which has been mentioned by the Regional Transport Officer, Bhopal, withdrawing the exemption of tax on the vehicles of the petitioners Under Section 11 (2) of the M. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1947, in his letter to the petitioners dated 14-5-1981.2. According to the petitioners, the petitioner is a public limited Company incorporated under the relevant Companies Act with its registered office at Sehore in the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is alleged that the petitioner, the Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd., Sehore purchased a sugar factory which was installed at Sehore by the ex-Rulerof Bhopal. It was a running concern known as Bhopal State Sugar Industry, This sugar industry had thousands of acres of agricultural lands and the ex-Ruler at the time of transfer of the sugar industry also sold along with the factory all the agricultural lands to the Company situated in the vicinity...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Bansidhar Singhal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1983
Reported in: [1984]150ITR17(MP)
Sohani, J.1. By this reference under Section 64 of the E.D. Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), 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 in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of the Appellate Controller that the retirement of the deceased lady from the partnership firm, M/s. Munnalal Pannalal & Sons, did not amount to relinquishment or abandonment of her share in the goodwill of the firm and that, as such, there was no gift of her share in the goodwill liable to duty within the meaning of Section 9 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ?'The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows. Smt. Bhuribai expired on February 7, 1975. She was a partner in a firm which carried on business in the name and style of 'M/s. Munnalal Pannalal & Sons, Ujjain'. She retired from the partnership on November 13, 1974. At ...
Tag this Judgment!Rambagas Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1068
J.S. Verma, J.1. The appellant Rambagas has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Bora alias Basodi, father of Dassobai (P.W. 4), at about 5.30 P.M. on 30.7.1980, on the outskirts of village Jamuptola in district Seoni. The first information report (Ex. P-5) was lodgedby Shriram (P.W. 3). stating that Dassobai (P.W.) daughter of the deceased, came running to him at 6 P.M. that day and informed him that one man had assaulted her father with a lathi' that on being asked the identity of the assailant, she said that he was a tall man with short hair, meaning thereby a stranger answering that description. It was further stated that on rushing in that direction, they found Bora alias Basodi lying dead and on being told by Surjan (P.W. 5} that he had seen the appellant Rambagas running away, they chased Rambagas and caught him near the river and then seized a bloodstained lathi from him. It was also stated that the Dhoti of Rambagas has bloo...
Tag this Judgment!Jheena and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1375
J.S. Verma, J.1. Four persons, namely, Jheena, Bhojelal, Ramsingh and Chokhe, were tried for the murder of Dukali. All of them have been convicted of this offence and sentenced to life imprisonment. Criminal Appeal No. 1509 of 1980 is by Jheena and Ramsingh, while Appeal No. 77 of 1981 is by Bhojelal against their convictions and sentences. We are informed that the fourth convicted accused Chokhe has not preferred any appeal against his conviction and sentence.2. At the very out set, we shall dispose of the appeal of Ramsingh. The challan as well as the first information report mention the age of Ramsingh as 15 years. The entire material available on the record, therefore, indicates that Ramsingh was definitely below the age of 16 years even at the time of his trial. Accordingly, he was governed by the provisions of the M.P. Bal Adhiniyam and his trial and conviction according to the general procedure were, therefore, invalid. We accordingly set aside the conviction and sentence of Ram...
Tag this Judgment!The Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. (Wvg.) Co. Limited Vs. the Collector of Ce ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1983
Reported in: 1989(20)ECC117
ORDER1. Heard Shri Chitale, learned Counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission.2. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.3. The material facts giving rise to this petition briefly are as follows :--The petitioner has averred that it is engaged in the manufacture of sulphuric acid at its factory at Nagda for its captive consumption, that on 17th November, 1976, the petitioner filed before respondent No. 2 a price list for approval and that the said price list was approved by respondent No. 2 on 18th November, 1976 under Rule 173 C (2) of the Rules framed under the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). On 12-9-1978, respondent No. 2 issued a notice to the petitioner to show cause why the approved price be not revised under Rule 6(b)(i) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975, on the basis of values of comparable goods produced by other assessees at the nearest place, Kota. The petitioner submitted applications ...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1983
Reported in: [1983]54STC332(MP)
G.L. Oza, J.1. This is a reference made by the President, Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, for answering the following questions :(1) Whether the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the penalty in appeal as provided under Section 38(5) of the State Act includes the power to impose penalty, where it has not been imposed by the assessing authority ?(2) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty imposed under Section 43(1) read with Section 9(2) of the Central Act was justified?2. The facts stated in the statement of the case are that the assessee, M/s. Food Corporation of India, Bhopal, were assessed to tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, for the financial year starting from 1st April, 1967, to 31st March, 1968. Inter-State sales were determined as Rs. 6,38,14,360 and were assessed to tax amounting to Rs. 13,44,682. The first return was delayed by two months and 7 days and, therefore penalty of Rs. 4,000 was imposed by the assessing authority under Sec...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkumar Vs. Umedram Bora and Co. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1983
Reported in: [1986]59CompCas892(MP)
Gulab Gupta, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, by a claimant who suffered not only personal injuries in an accident on January 23, 1974, but also lost his cart, bullock and grain and whose claim for compensation has been dismissed by the Claims Tribunal, Satna, as barred by limitation.2. The brief facts either admitted or found are that on January 23, 1974, the appellant was driving his bullock cart from his village Birhooli to Satna on Simaria road, when truck No. MPA 7822 which was being driven by respondent No. 2, came from behind the cart, dashed against it and went away. It was a ' hit and run ' accident. The result of the accident was that one of the bullocks died, the bullock cart was smashed, 10 bags of paddy and 2 bags of wheat got scattered on the road, the second bullock and the claimant and his brother, Vijayakumar, received injuries. It appears that the report of the accident was lodged on the same date at police Chowki Kolgawa. The...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »