Madhya Pradesh Court November 1984 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Mithu Khan Vs. Pipariyawali and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-1984
Reported in: AIR1986MP39; 1985MPLJ119
Rampal Singh, J.1. The appellant-defendant has preferred this second appealunder Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure,against the judgment and decree passed byAdditional District Judge, Vidisha, in CivilAppeal No. 10A of 1972, dated 27-6-1972.2. The respondent No. 1-Plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Class II, Vidisha, against the appellant and respondents Nos. 2 and 3, alleging that defendant No. 2, Paras Ram executed an agreement for sale on 5-2-1960 of his agricultural land, survey No. 545/1, named 'Bada Gadha', situate in village Aharkotra, District Vidisha, for a consideration of Rs. 550/-. This amount was paid by him in two instalments, first of Rs. 400/-and second of Rs. 150/-. This second instalment was paid by him on 21-9-1963, for which he was given a receipt executed by respondent No. 2 Paras Ram. The plaintiff further averred that he was given the possession of the suit land. According to the plaintiff the appellant and the respondent No. 3, with full...
Smt. Josephine Pinto Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-1984
Reported in: [1986]158ITR674(MP)
P.D. Mulye, J. 1. By this reference made under Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act read with Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, has called for the opinion of this court on the following question of law ; ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in interpreting the word ' outstanding ' with reference to Section 2(m)(iii)(a) of the W.T. Act and accordingly whether the disallowance of the tax liability on this ground was justified ' 2. The facts giving rise to this reference, as per the statement of case received may be stated, in brief, thus : The assessee, Smt. Josephine Pinto, a citizen of India, is assessed as an individual and the assessment years involved are 1971-72 to 1974-75. The relevant valuation dates are December 31, 1970, December 31, 1971, December 31, 1972, and December 31, 1973, respectively. The assessment orders dated February 24, 1979, indicatethat the returns of wealth-tax f...
Dr. Girishkumar Vyas Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-1984
Reported in: AIR1985MP224
Oza, Ag. C.J. 1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner challenging the election of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and the Standing Committee and its Chairman and Members and the Consultative Committees elected on 31-3-1984 to be invalid and also for a declaration that the Municipal Corporation of Bhopal (Respondent 3) stands automatically dissolved on 26-3-1984. It is also sought that therefore the order of suspension passed against the petitioner by resolution of the Standing Committee, dated24-7-1984, be also quashed as it is without any authority.2. According to the petitioner, he had passed his M.B.B.S. Examination from Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal, in the year 1968 and in the year 1975 the Municipal Corporation, Bhopal, advertised the post of Medical Officer in the Corporation and the petitioner was appointed on 31-3-1975. It is alleged by the petitioner that although the Municipal Corporation, Bhopal, was constituted in the year 1967 but till 1983 there were no elections and ulti...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Thakurdas Jaiparvesh and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(MP)301
INDORE BENCHG. G. Sohani, J. - By this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the ITAT, 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 upholding the findings of the AAC that the sum of Rs. 2,00,930 received by the assessee from the Railways during the accounting year relevant to the asst. yr. 1975-76 is neither chargeable to tax as business profit not it is chargeable under s. 41(1) of the Act and consequently in upholding the AACs order deleting the sum of Rs. 91,748 taxed by the ITO ?2. The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows :The assessee-firm entered into a contract with the Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway, for executing earth work in connection with construction of bridges between Sumeri and Jeruwakhera. After partly executing the contract, the assessee abandon...
Hajra Bai and ors. Vs. Jadavbai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-1984
Reported in: AIR1986MP106
P.D. Mulye, J. 1. This appeal filed by the defendant-appellants is directed against the judgment and decree dated 18th August, 1979 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Mandleshwar, in C.S. No. 11-A of 1976, whereby he has decreed the plaintiff-respondent's suit for declaration and possession in respect of the disputed agricultural property bearing Khata No. 57, Kh. Nos. 37 and 38, having an area of 16.50, lagan 42.03 p. situated in village Jaimalpura, Tab. Barwaha holding that the sale deed Ex. D-2 dated 24-3-1972 in respect of these lands is not binding on the plaintiff and is void on the ground that the same was obtained by fraud and without consideration. 2. The plaintiff's case in the trial Court was as under : Defendant-appellant No. 1 Hajra Bai is the wife of appellant No. 2 Shamshuddin; appellant No. 3 Gaffur Khan is the brother of appellant No. 2 Shamshuddin; that the plaintiff's husband died on 6-7-1971; that she was the owner and in possession of agricultural lands...
Khoobchand JaIn and anr. Vs. Kashi Prasad and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1984
Reported in: AIR1986MP66; 1986MPLJ52
ORDERP.C. Pathak, J.1. This revision is filed by the decree-holders against the order dated 19-8-1982, passed by the Addl. Judge to the Court of District Judge, Chhatarpur, in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1981, arising out of Misc. Judicial Case No. 32 of 1980 of the Court of Civil Judge, Class I, Chhatarpur, dated 7-5-1981.2. In Civil Suit No. 34-B of 1965, the decree-holders obtained a decree against the judgment-debtors/non-applicants Nos. 1 to 3 on 15-12-1966 for a sum of Rs. 5,180/- as principal, Rs. 685/- as interest and future interest @ rupee 0.25% per month on the principal amount till the date of realisation. The suit against the non-applicant No. 4 was dismissed.3. The decree-holders filed an application for execution of the said decree on 30-6-1977, After the judgment-debtors had entered appearance, the Executing Court ordered to issue a warrant of attachment of moveables, on furnishing a list of moveable property and payment of process-fee within three days of the order. Th...
Khusilal and ors. Vs. Gorelal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1984
Reported in: AIR1986MP47; 1985MPLJ123
ORDERRampal Singh, J.1. The applicants, aggrieved by the order of First Additional Judge to District Judge, Vidisha, dt. 20-11-1981, have preferred this revision petition under Section 115 of the C.P.C.2. Non-applicant No, 1, Gorelal, filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the applicants in respect of agricultural lands Nos. 112, 105, 115 and 124, situate in village Margavali in district Vidisha. Non-applicant No. 1 along with the suit, filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the C.P.C., praying for issuance of temporary injunction against the defendant-applicants, for restraining them from interfering in the possession of the plaintiff.3. The trial Court on 15-4-1981 passed the following order:the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit as the Court thinks fit, until the disposal of the suit or until further order:izLrqr jktLo vfHkys[k [ksrkSuh izfrfyih lsik;k tkrk gS fd okn xzLr Hkwfe [kkrk ua- ' dh la;qDr [kkrs dh mHk;i{k dh H...
Thakur Prasad Vs. Bhagwandas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1984
Reported in: 1985MPLJ149
C. P. SEN, J.1. This opinion shall also govern Civil Revision No. 1784 of 1983 between the same parties. Both these revisions arise out of the same suit. The following question has been referred by the learned Single Judge for opinion of this Bench :'Whether in view of the deletion of Sub-rule (m) of Rule 1 of Order 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the Amending Act No. 104 of 1976, an appeal is competent under Order 43. Rule 1-A, particularly when there is a bar to appeal under Section 96(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure?'2. The parties are real brothers. Their father Dhannalal died in the year 1964 leaving behind his widow Smt. Reotibai and five sons, including the applicant and non-applicant. By agreement dated 29-1-1980. the legal representatives of Dhannalal, referred the dispute regarding the property left by the deceased to Panchas. However, due to certain opposition the Panchas could not give their award and closed the proceeding. The non-applicant then filed civil suit for...
Shivajirao Angre Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1984
Reported in: (1985)47CTR(MP)54; [1986]158ITR162(MP)
P.D. Mulye, J. 1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the matter of Section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with a prayer to quash the impugned order/notification (annexure E-1) and also to quash the impugned notices (annexures D, D-1 to D-5) and also for a direction restraining the respondents from giving effect to the order of transfer of the income-tax cases of the petitioner from Ujjain to Gwalior. 2. According to the petitioner, he is residing in his own house in Ujjain since 1949, and his source of income is agriculture from the lands situated in villages Panbihar and Bhitri, in Ujjain district. This is a joint family property consisting of himself, his wife and his son and is being managed and looked after by him as manager and karta of the joint Hindu family. Further, according to the petitioner, he is being assessed to income-tax and wealth-tax in the status of a karta of the joint Hindu family consisting of himself, his wi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›