Madhya Pradesh Court October 1987 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.
Ashokkumar Vs. Sangitabai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-06-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP59; 1988MPLJ344
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. Heard Shri Goyal, learn(sic) counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ga(sic) learned Counsel, who appears on show cau(sic) notice of I.A. No. 2332/87.2. The question which arises (sic) consideration in this revision petition (sic) whether an interlocutory order made in (sic) proceeding under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage(sic) Act, can be executed on withdrawal a(sic) termination of the proceedings. The petition(sic) filed a suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marria(sic) Act for restitution of conjugal-rights. In (sic) course of proceedings, an application un(sic) Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for entrust(sic) the custody of her son, Pawankumar, ag(sic) about 4 years, was made. By order dt. 8-5-1(sic) the trial Court directed that custody(sic)(sic)awankumar be restored to the respondent, (sic)angita, mother of the child. After this order (sic)as made on 18-6-87, the petitioner proved In application under Order 23, C.P.C. for (sic)withdrawal of the suit. Trial ...
Beharilal Gupta and anr. Vs. Binod Mills Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1987
Reported in: [1988]64CompCas117(MP)
K.L. Srivastava, J. 1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing the criminal complaint under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, filed against the present petitioners and one Rampal Gupta (Vide Criminal Case No. 1845 of 1987 of the C. J. M. Ujjain).2. Circumstances giving rise to this petition are these. The said Rampal Gupta, who is the uncle of petitioner No. 1 and the husband of petitioner No. 2, was the executive director of the non-applicant-company. In that capacity he had been allotted the bungalow in question situate at Ujjain. After he had resigned from that office, the aforesaid complaint under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, has been filed on the ground that he did not vacate the bungalow even after the acceptance of his resignation.3. The contention of the petitioners' learned counsel is that Section 630 of the Companies Act in terms permits filing of a complaint by the company only against the office-bearer or ...
Gwalior Sugar Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1987
Reported in: [1989]178ITR415(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi, has referred the following question to this court for its opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the assessee's claim of depreciation at the rate of 15 per cent, on the machinery in question ?'2. The assessee, Gwalior Sugar Co. Ltd., Dabra, claimed depreciation at the higher rate of 15 per cent, on machinery on the ground that in the process of preparation of sugar, it came into contact with corrosive chemicals. This claim has been repelled by the Tribunal, but, on an application made in this behalf by the assessee, the Tribunal has referred the aforesaid question to this court for its opinion. In repelling the claim made by the assessee, the Tribunal placed reliance on a decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. . It has been held in the case o...
Mangilal Vs. Gitabai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1591
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 1973 (for short 'the Code') against He revisional order dated 31-3-87 passed by the Second AddL Sessions Judge Ratlam in Criminal Revision No. 3 of 1985 whereby the order passed by the Inquiring Magistrate granting the non-applicant's application under Section 125 of the Code and making a monthly allowance in the sum of Rs. 75/- against the petitioner has been maintained.2. The contention of the petitioner's learned Counsel is that the petitioner has obtained a decree for divorce on the ground of desertion and, therefore, the order for maintenance in favour of the non-applicant could not be passed In support of this submission he has placed reliance on the Bombay decision in Smt. Shantibai's case, (1985) 2 Crimes 901.3. In the aforesaid decision with reference to Sub-section (4) of Section 125 of the Code and Sub-section (2) of Section 127 of the Code, it was urged that the decree for divorce on the gro...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›