Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Union of India (Uo ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1986
Reported in: 2(1986)ACC389
P.C. Pathak, J.1. This is an appeal by plaintiff (hereinafter referred as to Corporation) against the judgment and decree dated 7th March, 1980, in Civil Suit No. 9-B of 1977 in the First Additional District Judge, Btlaspur.2. The Corporation filed the suit for damages amounting to Rs.23,000/-, on the allegations that its passenger bus going from Raipur to Ambikapur was damaged at railway crossing near Chakarmatha, Hini mines by railway Engine of South-Eastern Railway, at about 11 P.M., on 16-7-1976. The Engine dashed against the bus which got entangled in with the front portion of the Engine and the Engine carried away the bus to a distance of 80 yards. On 17-7-1976, the damaged bus was detached from the Engine. The bus was repaired in the work-shop of the Corporation. Rs. 14,509.27P. was claimed for repairing the bus, as detailed in the plaint. The Corporation also claimed Rs. 5,730-40P. for Joss of income @ Rs. 98.90P. for the period 16-7-76 to 12-9-76, during which the bus remained...
Smt. Chuneela Kumari Vs. Karunashanker
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1986
Reported in: AIR1988MP232; 1988MPLJ24
ORDERB.C. Varma, J.1. This revision filed under Section 23-E of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act. 1961 arises under these circumstances.2. On 26-3-1964, the non-applicant' landlord filed an application under Section 23-A(a) of the Aet claiming eviction of the applicant from the accommodation in question on the ground that it was required bona fide by him for his residence. After obtaining due leave to defend, the applicant filed her written statement on 26-6-1984. Some evidence was also recorded. Before she application could he finally decided, M. P. Accommodation Control (Amendment Ordinance, 1985 (No. 1 of 1985) was promulgated with effect from 16th day of January. 1985. This Ordinance later was superseded by M. P. Accommodation Control (Amendnlent) Act, 1985 (Act No. 7 of 1985) which came into force on 5-4-1985. The Ordinance and the Act inserted Section 23-J whereurder 'Landlord' has been separately defined for the purpose of Chapter III-A which contains Sections 23 A t...
Sharda Talkies Vs. Dhadiwal Exhibitors, Raipur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1986
Reported in: AIR1987MP164
B.C. Varma, J.1. Respondent/plaintiff sued the appellant/defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 10,000/-. The summary procedure under Section 37, Code of Civil Procedure, was adopted for the trial of that suit. On 4-8-1978, the trial Court directed summons to be issued to the defendant in Form IV in Appendix B, Code of Civil Procedure. On 24-10-1978, the trial court held that the appellant was duly summoned and did not appear and, therefore, he was proceeded ex parte. On 15-11-1978, an ex parte decree was passed. It appears that thereafter the appellant applied for setting aside the ex parte decree. That application was allowed and the ex parte decree was set aside. This was in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 11 of 1979. On the ex parte decree being set aside, the civil suit was again taken on its original number and on 28-7-1979, the counsel for the appellant filed registered address. The Court again directed notice in Form IV, Appendix-B, Code of Civil Procedure, to be served upon t...
Babulal Agarwal Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1986
Reported in: 1986MPLJ398; [1987]66STC164(MP)
B.M. Lal, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitu-tion of India.2. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is challenging the validity of the orders passed by respondent No. 2, Divisional Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bilaspur, contained in annexures F-1 and F-2 dated 23rd April, 1984.3. The facts leading to this petition are as under: The petitioner-firm carries on business of quarry lease at villages Nawalpur and Kathari in Bilaspur District by manufacturing metal (gitti) by stone-crusher. According to him the year of assessment is from Diwali to Diwali. The firm had filed all the quarterly returns for Diwali ending 1980-81, but did not file any return for the period after Diwali,i.e., 1980-81 and 1981-82.4. On 18th December, 1981, the place of business of the petitioner was raided by the Sales Tax Flying Squad and during the raid certain incriminating documents, i.e...
Agro Pipes Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-1986
Reported in: [1987]65STC438(MP)
ORDERR.K. Verma, J1. This is a reference made on an application filed by the applicant-assessee under Section 44(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), whereby the learned President, Board of Revenue, has referred the following question of law to this Court for decision:Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the P.V.C. pipes will not be covered under Notification No. 1061-537-V-ST dated 7th April, 1967, as modified by Notification No. 1432-138-V-ST dated 3rd July, 1971 and were assessable to tax under entry Co. 56(ii) of Part II of Schedule II appended to the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 ?2. The facts in brief, leading to this reference are as under:The applicant'-assessee which is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of P.V.C. tubes and pipes was assessed to tax for the period 1st July, 1974 to 30th June, 1976. The sale of P.V.C. pipes was assessed to tax for the period 1st July, 1974 to 30th August, 1974 at the rate...
Dilip Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ212
K.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22-10-1982 passed by the IXth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in Sessions Trial No. 101 of 1982 convicting the appellant Under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. According to prosecution case the appellant on 16-3-1982 met the prosecutrix Ku. Sandhya (P.W. 1), a school girl aged 16 years, and proposed to marry her. He, under threat, took her in an auto-rickshaw to Bank Colony, Indore. From there in the evening he took her to Rajendra Nagar and from there to Mhow by bus. Then they boarded the train for Khandwa and reached there by 3 A.M. From there they proceeded to Kalyan (Maharashtra). On 17-3-1982 at Kalyan the appellant thrice committed rape on her in the residence of his elder brother Umesh. On 19-3-1982 the elder brother of the appellant brought them back to Indore and she was handed over to her parents.3. At Indore, when the prosecutr...
Hazi Abdul Rehman and anr. Vs. Ashok Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-1986
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ747
ORDERP.C. Pathak, J.1. This is an application by accused Abdul Rehman and Mohd. Yakub, Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for opportunity of hearing on question of sentence and modification of sentence passed on them in Cr. A. No. 1090/1981 dated 22-11-1985.2. Ashok Kumar, Secretary of Riddhi Siddhi Power Loom Weavers' Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. Sari Bazar, Burhanpur (hereinafter called 'the Society') filed a complaint against Hazi Abdul Rehman and his son Mohd. Yakub Under Section 407 of the Indian Penal Code, on the allegation that they committed criminal breach of trust of 120 bags of yarn valued at Rs. 1,31,849.22 paise, entrusted to them as carrier by M/s. Mama Road Lines, for delivery to the Society. Accepting the plea of the accused that they handed over the consignment of yarn to M/s. Raj Agency, the agent of Society the trial Court acquitted both the accused persons. The society through its Secretary filed appeal Under Section 378(4) of the Code of C...
Sujanmal Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-1986
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC587
R.K. Verma, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India directed against the order passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal.2. The material facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are as follows:Respondent No. 2, the Regional Transport Authority, Indore, invited applications for grant of permit under Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for one daily return trip on the route Meghnagar, Sardarpur via Jhabua, Ranapur, Para, Bavdi, Chhalnimata, Tirla, Rajgarh, Chhadawad and Piparn. The petitioner was one of the applicants. The Regional Transport Authority, after considering the claims of the various applicants, granted permission to the petitioner on the aforesaid route. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, after hearing the petitioner and the objectors, proposed the timings for the new service of the petitioner on the route in question. That time table was provisionally approved by the R...
Kunja Vs. Lalaram and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-1986
Reported in: 1987MPLJ746; AIR 1987 MP 252
ORDERT.N. Singh, J.1. Injustice is not law. Justice is law. Shri K.N. Gupta, submits that the Court will not go door to door to deliver justice. But I told him, litigants coming to Court must notsee the doors of the Court shut and no Court shall shut its door to the litigants.2. It is another unfortunate case whose number is running into legion. After 12 years this matter has seen the light of the day though it had to be disposed of only by a very short order as a single and simple point of law merely is involved in the case. This appeal is against an order passed by the lower Appellate Court refusing to restore the appeal for rehearing after setting aside ex parte decree passed against the respondents.3. Shri Dubey has made a very short submission founded on violation of Rule 19 of Order 5, C.P.C. and I have no doubt that the contention of learned counsel for the appellant must prevail despite the forceful arguments of Shri Gupta, who appears for the respondents in this case. Shri Dub...
Major M.P.M. Pillai and anr. Vs. M.P. State Road Transport Corporation ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-1986
Reported in: 2(1986)ACC169
C.P. Sen, J.1. By this order Misc. (F) Appeal No. 38 of 1982 (M.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Major M.P.M. Pillai and Ors. is also disposed of. Both these appeals have been filed Under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 against the award of compensation of Rs. 20,664/- with costs and future interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum. Misc. (F) Appeal No. 444 of 1981 has been preferred by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation by a further sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-, while Misc. (F) Appeal No. 38 of 1982 has been preferred by the Corporation for dismissal of the claim.2. The claimants-Major R.P.M. Pillai and Mrs. K. Ruknum Hemmaare the parents of deceased Suresh Nair, who died after involving in an accident on 12-9-1977 at about 3.45 p.m. near the General Post Office situated on Sultania Road, Bhopal. The deceased was driving a scooter CPB 3917 and his friend Dr. K.P. Yadav (A.W. 2) was sitting on the pillion. Bus No. MPW 8039 belonging to the Corporation and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »