Madhya Pradesh Court January 1987 Judgments
Madan Mohan Vs. Gauri Shankar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP152
T.N. Singh, J. 1. It is a very unfortunate case that two courts below have not even read and properly construed Ex. P/1 on which the suit was based, even though the suit was dismissed by the learned appellate Court, reversing the decree passed by the trial Court.2. On reading the pleadings, I have little doubt that plaintiff's main plea was founded on the doctrine of part-performance which is mentioned in categorical terms in para 3 of the plaint. On the basis of this plea, the plaintiff was merely entitled to a decree of permanent injunction to protect his possession although he laid a tall claim for specific performance of contract on the footing that Ex. P/1 was an agreement to sell the suit land. I have myself read the document with counsel for the parties but I am unable to satisfy myself that it is any thing else than a sale-deed. However, Ex. P/1 being an unregistered document, the sale must fail.3. There is a very clear averment in the description itself that it was a 'BIKRINAM...
Tag this Judgment!Madhiya Vs. Rameshchandra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-1987
Reported in: II(1987)ACC504
R.K. Varma, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.A. No. 110/1983 (Rameshchandra and Anr. v. Madhiya and Anr.).2. This is an appeal by the claimant Mddhiya S/o Sukhlal against the award dated 4-1-1983 passed by the Member M itor Accidents Claim* Tribunal, Dhar in Claim Case No. 30 of 1980 whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 13,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum as against the claim of Rs. 70,200/- made by the claimant-appellant. In the cross-appeal (MA. No. 110/83) filed by the owner and driver of the vehicle in question, they have sought setting aside of the award alleging negligence on the part of the claimant himself as the cause of accident.3. The material facts leading to these appeals, briefly stated, are as under:4. On 3-3-1980, Truck No. MPO 1890, loaded with manure, was being driven by the driver respondent No. 2 and the claimant along with other labourers, was sitting on the truck. The truck loaded of manure was being transp...
Tag this Judgment!Parmanand Choudhary and ors. Vs. Smt. Shukla Devi Mishra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-1987
Reported in: [1990]67CompCas45(MP)
C.P. Sen, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 485 of the Companies Act, 1956, by the appellants/petitioners against rejection of their petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Act, for relief against oppression and mismanagement, by the learned single judge.2. A partnership firm known as 'Durga Pesticides' comprising petitioners Nos. 1 and 2, Paramanand Choudhary and Sunderlal Dalai, and respondent No. 2, Brijmohan Mishra, was constituted with effect from August 1, 1974, for carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of pesticides at Burhanpur, Khandwa District. The business was located at 13, Industrial Estate, Burhanpur. Each of the three partners contributed a capital of Rs. 25,000 and the profits and losses were to be shared almost equally between them. This firm was reconstituted with effect from April 1, 1976, by the addition of petitioner No. 3, Smt. Tara Devi and Smt. Padmadevi Gupta also as partners. The shares of all the five partners as well as their contribution to...
Tag this Judgment!ignatius John Vs. Surajbai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-1987
Reported in: 2(1988)ACC288
S.S. Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Award dated 31-7-1978 given by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shajapur in Claim Case No. 15 of 1975.2. Respondent No. 1 Surajbai is the widow of Kaluram and the other three respondents are the sons and daughter of the said Kaluram. Accident in question had occured on 8-6-1975 in the evening at about 6 p.m. on the Agra-Bombay road. At that time the deceased-Kaluram was coming on a cycle to his village Thukrana from Shajapur.3. The allegation is that the appellant was driving a Mercdes car, bearing registration No. D.H.G. 9569, rashly and negligently. The speed of the car was excessive and dashed Kaluram resulting in grevious injuries. Kaluram died the same night at about 9 p.m. The respondents, therefore, filed a claim petition claiming Rs. 3,76,000/- as compensation from the appellant.4. The appellant in his evidence stated that he was travelling in the car from Delhi to Bombay. He left Gwalior in the morning at about 1...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Malhotra Dairy
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-1987
Reported in: [1987]166ITR241(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 Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that two separate assessments were to be made on the assessee in respect of the two periods of the relevant accounting year of the assessment year 1979-80, i.e., the period up to the death of Heeralal and the period thereafter ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :3. The assessee is a partnership firm and the assessment year in question is 1979-80, for which the accounting year ended on July 31, 1978. During the accounting year, one of the partners of the partnership firm, Heeralal, died on March 21, 1978, and the firm was reconstituted by the remaining part...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Commercial Automobiles
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-1987
Reported in: [1988]71STC137(MP)
1. The Board of Revenue, M. P., Gwalior, has referred the following three questions to this Court for its answer under Section 44 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ): (i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sales of the stock of motor spirit which has suffered tax under the M. S. T. Act, 1957 (Act No. 4 of 1958) will be exempt from the levy of tax under the M. P. G. S. T. Act, 1958 on and after 1st August, 1972 (that is, the date from which the M. S. T. Act was repealed) taking support from the provisions of Section 8(1) of the M. P. Vitta Adhiniyam, 1972 and Section 10 of the M. P. General Clauses Act, 1957 (ii) Whether provisions of Section 54 of M. P. G. S. T. Act, 1958 will be applicable for claiming exemption on sales of the stock of motor spirit on and after 1st August, 1972 (iii) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that sale of old staff car will not be covered by the term 'business' in view of the judgmen...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Trading Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-1987
Reported in: (1987)62CTR(MP)7; [1987]166ITR211(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 activity of letting out the factory building did not constitute business and the income was assessable as income from property instead of business income and consequently in holding that the assessee-firm was not entitled to registration ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :For the assessment year 1976-77, the assessee applied for registration under Section 185 of the Act. Registration was refused by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that as the assessee had income only from letting out its dal mill, the assessee had no income from any business and hence was not entitled to registration. On ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Raja Bahadur Singh Kasliwal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1987
Reported in: [1987]166ITR452(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J.1. The order in this case shall also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Civil Cases Nos. 213 to 215, 219, 220, 224 to 226, 229 to 242, 244 to 248, all of 1984.2. These are applications under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. The material facts giving rise to these applications, briefly, are as follows:4. The assessee-respondent is a beneficiary in two trusts known as Sir Hukumchand Trust and Lady Kanchanbai Trust. The assessee holds life interest in the two trusts and has also the right of a reversioner in the corpus of the trust property. While framing the assessment of the assessee under the Act for the assessment year in question, the Wealth-tax Officer included the value of the life interest and reversion to corpus in the trust property in the assessee's total wealth. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the value of life interest and reversion to corpus in the two trusts were not includible in ...
Tag this Judgment!General Foods Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1987
Reported in: [1987]66STC271(MP)
ORDERG.G. Sohani, J.1. The order in this case will also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 336 of 1984 as a common question of law is involved in both these references.2. By these references under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Board of Revenue has referred the following question of law to this Court for its opinion :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Board of Revenue was justified in holding that the husk of soyabean was liable to be taxed as the same was not covered by Notification No. 1073-537-V-ST dated 7th April, 1967, as extended from time to time and consequently it was not exempt from payment of turnover tax ?3. The material facts giving rise to these references, briefly, are as follows :While framing the assessment of the assessee under the Act, the contention of the assessee that the husk of soyabean was exempt from tax under the notification dated 7th A...
Tag this Judgment!Mahajan Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1987
Reported in: [1987]66STC256(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J.1. By this reference under Section 44(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Board of Revenue 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 penalty was imposable under Section 43(1) of the Act even when no returns for the relevant period were filed by the dealer 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :The assessee deals in kirana, sugar, grain, etc. He was assessed to tax under the Act for the assessment year 1968-69. Best judgment assessment was framed as the assessee had submitted returns for the first and second quarters only but not for the third and fourth quarters. A penalty was imposed under Section 17(3) of the Act on the assessee on account of delay in payment of tax with regard to the third and fourth quarters. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »