Madhya Pradesh Court January 1986 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.
Mooiji Jatmal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1986
Reported in: [1986]160ITR475(MP)
J.S. Verma, Actg. C.J. 1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for a direction to the Tribunal to state the case and refer to this court for its decision certain questions of law said to arise out of the Tribunal's order dated July 25, 1980, confirming the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act upon the assessee for the assessment year 1969-70. The final assessment for that year was made at Rs. 40,770 as against the returned income of Rs. 24,999, making an addition of Rs. 16,304. The assessee did not challenge the assessment which became final. A notice was given to the assessee to show cause why penalty should not be imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee did notcare to show any cause against that notice. Accordingly, a penalty of Rs. 16,305 was imposed which was later affirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as the Tribunal. 2. It is not disputed before us that by virtue of the Explanation to Section 27...
Vineet Talkies Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1986
Reported in: [1986]160ITR468(MP)
J.S. Verma, Actg. C.J. 1. In accordance with the direction of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has stated the case and referred to this court for its decision, the following question of law, viz. : ' Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, there was justification in law to disallow the amount of Rs. 2,000 as entertainment expenses '2. The relevant assessment year is 1972-73. The assessee owns a cinema theatre and earns income out of the same. One of the items claimed as deduction on account of expenses was Rs. 2,000 out of the total miscellaneous expenses claimed at Rs. 12,298. This amount of Rs. 2,000 claimed to have been spent in extending ordinary courtesies of the business was disallowed as a deduction at the time of assessment by the Income-tax Officer. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner affirmed that conclusion. Before the Tribunal in further appeal by the assessee, no challenge was made to the finding disallowing the deduct...
State of M.P. Vs. Kalyan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ209
ORDERRam Pal Singh, J.1. After obtaining the requisite leave, the State-appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal recorded by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sheopur Kalan, in criminal case No. 304 of 1982 dt. 24-1-1983.2. The respondents were prosecuted by the State for having committed offence punishable Under Sections 323 and 326/148, IPC. They were, accordingly, charged for having committed these offences on 22-2-1982 at 3.00 p.m. in village Bilwara. The charge was framed by the trial Court on 10-7-1982. On 2-12-1982 the prosecution examined its witnesses Ramgopal (P.W. 1), Nanji Ram (P.W. 2) and Malkham (P.W. 3). Other present witnesses Ramsingh and Devishankar were bound over for the next day, i.e. 3-12-1982. On 3-12-1982 Ramsingh and Devishankar were examined, cross-examined and discharged. The court on that date directed rest of the witnesses to be examined and fixed the case for further prosecution evidence on 18-12-1982. On 18-12-1982 the prosecu...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sanjeeda Bi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1986
Reported in: 2(1986)ACC38
B.C. Verma, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. Noshe Khan died on 5-10-1977 as a consequence of an accident. His wife Smt. Sanjeeda Bi claimed compensation for the death of her husband. In the claim petition which was filed before the Accident Claims Tribunal, Abdul Kamruddin was joined as a driver, New Janata Transport through its Manager, Hamidia Road, Bhopal was joined as owner and the National Insurance Company Ltd., Indore was joined as insurer of the vehicle. In the petition M.P.B. 9693 was mentioned to be the number of the vehicle. The petition was filed first before the Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhopal where the insurer was represented by a counsel. Later, an Accident Claims Tribunal was also constituted at Raisen and the claim petition was transferred to that Tribunal. According to the appellant insurer, no service was made by the Tribunal at Raisen. That Tribunal, however, proceeded ex-parte against the appellant. Apart from filing an appl...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shriram Development Company
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-1986
Reported in: (1986)52CTR(MP)208; [1986]159ITR812(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J. 1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (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 justified in holding that the order of the Income-tax Officer was not erroneous and thus holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is bad in law ?' 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows: The assessee is a firm carrying on business of developing residential colonies. Certain parcels of land belonging to the assessee were acquired by the State Government on May 26, 1966. The Collector awarded compensation to the assessee, but, on a reference, the learned Additional District Judge, Indore, by his order dated May 10, 1974, enhanced the amount of compens...
Ramroopsingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1256
K.K. Verma, J.1. Applicant Ranroopsingh by Shri B.R. Sharma, Advance.2. State by Shri P.D. Agarwal, panel Lawyer.3. Letter No. 69/dated 13-1-86 of the District and Sessions judge, Shivpuri shows that the copy of this Court's order dated 3-1-86 was received by him on 11-1-86. It should have been sent in his name; the office to explain the omission. The Sessions Judge says that the report in question had been sent to the Registry with a special messenger named Devkinandan, Process Server. A copy of that report dated 24-12-85 has been enclosed with the Session Judge's memo. The Addl. Registrar will make an enquiry an fix the blame on the original report No. 983/dated 24-12-85 sent by the Addl. Session Judge, Shivpuri before this Court. The Addl. Registrar will put up the explanations of the clerks concerned before me in the Chambers, within 10 days from today.4. learned Counsel for both the sides have been heard on the bail application.5. Applicant's learned Counsel has filed the order-sh...
Moolshankar Vs. Ramgopal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-1986
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC367
P.D. Mulye, J.1. The claimant-appellant has filed this appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicle? Act, for enhancement of compensationagainst an award dated 29th July, 1978 given by the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ratlam, in Claim Case No. 10/76, whereby be has awarded compensation of Rs. 4,000/- plus interest at Rs. 6% per annum from the date of the award, though the appellant had put up a claim for Rs. 40,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place on 22-2-1976.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated, in brief, this : Respondent No. 1 Ramgopal is the owner of auto-rikshaw number NPN 8089 which on the relevant day of the accident, which took place on 22-2-76 was insured with respondent No. 2. United India Fire and General Insurance Company.3. The appellant who was then posted as a Deputy Collector at Ratlam was on 22-2-76 at about 5 P.M proceeding in the said auto rikshaw along with the members of his family. When the auto-r...
Nanne Khan Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-15-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1403
K.K. Verma, J.1. The petitioner, a truck-driver, was convicted and sentenced by a Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sheopur Kalan in Regular Criminal Case No. 61/1979 on 17-5-1982 for one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 250/- and in default 3 months' rigorious imprisonment under Section 304A, I.P.C., and a fine of Rs. 250/- under Section 279, I.P.C. The petitioner's appeal (No. 120/82) was dismissed in loto by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sheopur Kalan on 2 4-83. The petitioner has therefore come up in revision against the appellate judgment.2. The following concurrent findings of the Courts below were not challenged before me. Late in the afternoon on 14-11-1978, a truck (No. 6607 M.P.D.) driven by the petitioner was involved in an accident on the outskirts of the village of Nanawad on a public road, near a culvert of a canal, resulting in the death of P.W. 2, Gangadhar's son Pappu (aged 8 years). It is not in dispute that after the accident, the truck was halted and ...
Toran Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-15-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1986
Ram Pal Singh, J.1. The appellant has challenged his conviction under Sections 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code, recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Basoda, in Sessions Trial No. 42 of 1982, dated 23-3-1983. He has ' been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years on each count; both the sentences to run concurrently.2. Brief facts are that Leelabai (P.W. 12) was kidnapped on 18-4-1981 at 5.00 a.m. from her house by the appellant. She was taken from place to place and was subjected to rape by the appellant. Consequently, he was arrested and was prosecuted. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses. Leelabai (P.W. 12) narrated the entire story before the trial Judge. Portions of her testimony were corroborated by the first information report lodged by Nannulal (P.W. 2) in police station Basoda D/-18-4-1981 at 5.00 p.m. Bhanukumar (P.W. 3) is the brother of the prosecutrix Kailash (P.W. 5) is the uncle of the prosecutrix and Smt. Mayabai (P.W. 10) is her mother. Jasram Sharma (P...
Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Prem Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-15-1986
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC536
P.C. Pathak, J.1. This appeal is by M.P.S.R.T.C. (hereinafter referred as to the Corporation), against award dated 21-7-1980, in Claims Case No. 23/78, whereby respondents 1 to 4, were awarded compensation of Rs. 20,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from 30-6-1978 till the date of recovery.2. On 25-1-1978 at about 4-5 a.m., deceased Punaram was coming to Raipur on his bullock-cart. There were other bullock-carts going ahead of his bullock-cart. It is said that bus belonging to the Corporation and driven by respondent No. 5 was also proceeding to Raipur. The said bus was driven rashly and negligently as also without light. The said bus dashed against hind portion of the bullock-cart. Due to this, Punaram was thrown ahead from his own bullock-cart and was sandwiched between his own cart and the other cart going ahead of his cart. He received grievous injuries and was, therefore, shifted to hospital where he died on the same night at 8.30 p.m. Respondents one to four claimed Rs. 1,01,000...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »