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.
Man Singh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ693; 1987MPLJ511
Ram Pal Singh, J.1. The appellants, aggrieved by their conviction recorded by Sessions Judge, Datia, in Session Trial No. 25 of 1981, judgment dated 27-2-1982, have preferred this appeal. They have been convicted Under Section 307 read with Section 34, Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each.2. The appellants during the trial were charged for having committed an offence punishable Under Section 307 read with Section 34, I.P.C., for having attempted to commit the murder of Raghuvir Singh on 22-3-1981 at or about 1.30 p.m. in village Kotra in front of the house of Ramsewak, Patel. During the trial, the prosecution examined Hemraj (P. W. 1), Bhairon Singh (P. W. 2), Ramsewak (P. W. 3), Ajab Singh (P. W. 4), Nirbhai Singh (P. W. 5) and Jagdish (P. W. 8) as eye-witnesses of this crime. All these witnesses have stated that on 22-3-1981 at about 1.30 p.m. Raghuvir Singh, Hemraj, Bhairon Singh, Ramsewak, Ajab Singh, Nirbhai Singh and Jagdish were sitting...
Mohan Rathor Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-09-1986
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1280
Ram Pal Singh, J.1. Appellant has preferred this appeal against his conviction in Sessions Trial No. 155 of 1982 dated 15-2-1983 under Section 307, Penal Code, recorded by Sessions Judge, Guna. He has been sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 150/- in default of payment of which, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Appellant was tried along with Omprakash and Billu for having committed an offence punishable under Section 307/34, IPC., and both the co-accused were acquitted except the appellant.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, was that on 16-8-1982 at at about 6.00 p.m. in Hanuman Gali, Guna, Ravindra Kumar Jain (P.W. 1) was coming down from his home after taking his evening meal, and when he saw the appellant quarrelling with the younger brother of Sumer Chand, he intervened, but the appellant abused and rushed towards him. Ravindra Kumar (P.W. 1), consequently, fled towards his shop but he was overpowered by the appellant and h...
Rajendra Vs. Bishambhar Nath and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1986
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC379
K.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for Short 'the Act') is directed against the award dated 8-11-1982 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Dhar in Claim case No. 44 of 1980.2. It is in dispute that at about 11.00 a.m. on 1-3-1980 when at Dhamnod Gourishankar as the servant of Bishambharnath was driving the latter's truck bearing Registration No. CPF 8466 Rajendra happened to be there. The said Rajendra alias Rajesh had fallen down on the road and has sustained injuries.3. On the relevant date, the truck was insured with the New India Assurance Co. Indore.4. According to the application under Section 110-A of the Act filed on 28-7-1980 Rajendra aged 15 years a student of VII class was on a bicycle going by the side of the road. The truck driver driving the truck negligently and at a high speed reached there from the opposite direction. He swerved it to the wrong side and dashed it against the said cyclist. As a result of the ac...
Mittal Ice and Cold Storage Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1986
Reported in: (1986)52CTR(MP)123; [1986]159ITR18(MP)
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 Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in law in rejecting the assessee's claim for investment allowance under Section 32A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by holding also that the definition of the word 'manufacturing process' i.e., undergoing a change as a result of cold storage operation, given in Section 2(k) of the Factories Act, 1948, will not be imported for the purpose of allowing investment allowance to the assessee ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :The assessee is a registered firm deriving its income by operating a cold storage plant. For the assessment year 1979-80, the assessee filed a return disclosing loss of Rs. 19,250 by claimi...
Anoopsingh Vs. Indersingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1986
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC396
K.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This ordor shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal No. 5 of 1983 (Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation v. Anoopsingh and Ors.) which is also against the award dated 6-8-1982 made by the III Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Indore in Claim Case No. 16 of 1979.2. It is not in dispute that on 26-9-1978, at place between Bicholi and Manpur, District Indore, on the A.B. Road, there was a collision between the passenger bus No. CPH belonging to the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') and the truck No. MPE 9069 which belonged to the respondent Indersingh. The accident had occurred due to the negligence of both the drivers of the vehicles and they were responsible for it in equal measure. Shankar was driving the bus at the relevant time and Jasbir was driving the accident truck. As a result of the accident, in addition to the bus driver Shankar, Nandlal Nigam, Ramchandra and Mahesh Kumar who were passengers ...
Shyamsunder and anr. Vs. Bhanwarlal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1986
Reported in: AIR1986MP161; 1986MPLJ67
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J. 1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Civil Revision No. 378 of 1982 between the same parties. They arise out of the orders dt. 9-3-82 passed by the Civil Judge Class II Dhar in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 24 of 1981 and in the Execution Case No. 436-A of 1978.2. The circumstances giving rise to these revisions are these : -Non-applicant is the tenant of the applicant in the accommodation in question (upper storey of House No. 79 Shivaji Marg Dhan Mandi Dhar). A suit for eviction (Civil Suit No. 436-A of 1978) was instituted against him in the Court of Civil Judge Class II Dhar under Section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act 1961 (for short 'the Act') on the grounds of non-payment of arrears despite notice and the same also amounting to nuisance and also on the ground of encroachment of a portion of the accommodation not let to him. Thus the grounds were those mentioned in Ss. 12(l)(a), 12(l)(c) and I2(l)(e) of the Act.3. The non...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. H.H. Maharaja Sahib Shri Lokendra Singh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1986
Reported in: (1986)51CTR(MP)146; [1986]162ITR93(MP)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal, has made this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court on the following question of law:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the provisions of Section 55(2) of the Income-tax Act, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that no capital gains accrued to the assessee '2. The facts giving rise to this reference, as per the statement of case received, may be stated in brief, thus : The respondent-assessee is an ex-ruler of the erstwhile State of Ratlam, which was founded by the late Maharaja Ratansinghji. A jagir was conferred upon Shri Ratansingh with the rank of seh-hazari (commander of 3,000 horses), the insignia of the chaur (yak's tail), morchal (peacock plumes) suraj-mukhi (representation of the sun and the moon on fans), and mahimaratib (insignia of ...
Mohammad Umar Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-01-1986
Reported in: 1986(9)ECC223; 1986(26)ELT724(MP)
V.D. Gyani, J.1. All these criminal revisions are inter-connected. The nature of offences are the same, so also the basic facts are also identical.2. The petitioner was prosecuted for offences under Section 468 and 471 I.P.C. as also Section 9 of Central Excise Act, 1944. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was a licensee for carrying business in tobacco from 1957 to 1962. On 25.11.1958, he obtained another licence in the assumed name of Mohammad Yusuf and got the same renewed by application dated 4.12.1959, eventually cancelled by another application dated 11.7.1960. The petitioner issued sale notes as and when required in the name of Mohammad Yusuf, thereby knowingly forged the document and used the same for avoiding payment of excise duties. These are broad facts on which charges under Sections 458 and 471 I.P.C. and also Section 9 of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 were framed against the petitioner, who pleaded not guilty, but he was convicted by the trial court and hi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›