Madhya Pradesh Court December 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.
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Prithipal Singh and Co., Nagpur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP191; 1988MPLJ385
B.C. Varma, J.1. Pursuant to a contract executed on 5-4-1977 for construction of Central School building, Amla between the respondent contractor and the appellant, the respondent executed the work and completed it on 1-11-1978. In so doing, some extra work was also done for which the contractor laid a claim with the appellant. However, since the respondent wanted of amount shown in the final bill, he had to withdraw the claim for the extra work done. This withdrawal, according to him, was under coercion. The respondent then invoked the arbitration clause in the agreement and the dispute was referred to the sole arbitrator before whom another claim for Rs. 96,000/-was made by the respondent. In all, before the arbitrator, the respondent's claim was for Rs. 2,16,000/-. Before the arbitrator, statements were filed and evidence -- both documentary and oral -- was tendered. After hearing the parties, the arbitrator delivered the award on 15-5-1980 whereunder the respondent's claim for Rs. 1...
Deora P.U. Cabncon Mfg. Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra State Electricit ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas220(MP)
R.K. Verma, J. 1. This is an appeal filed by the plaintiff against the order dated September 25, 1981, passed by the tenth Additional Judge to the Court of the District Judge, Indore, in Civil Suit No. 55-A of 1980 whereby the learned trial court has decided the two preliminary issues regarding valuation of suit and the jurisdiction of the court against the plaintiff and has, consequently, directed return of the plaint for presentation in a proper court having jurisdiction.2. The plaintiff-appellant obtained contracts for supply of conductors and aluminium wires to the respondent-Maharashtra State Electricity Board (for short, 'the MSEB') pursuant to acceptance of their tenders (exhibit D-1 and exhibit D-3), etc. The plaintiff was required to furnish a bank guarantee for Rs. 50,000 to the MSEB by way of security in accordance with the conditions of the tender for due performance of the contract for supply of the goods aforesaid. Accordingly, at the instance of the plaintiff, the respon...
Nanalal Sobhagmal and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) (Through the Incom ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: [1988]173ITR151(MP)
K.L. Shrivastava, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated December 21, 1984, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. (Economic Offences), Indore, whereby the objections by the petitioners to their prosecution have been negatived.2. Circumstances giving rise to the revision petition are these. The Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Ratlam, on March 27, 1984, filed a complaint against the petitioners in respect of offences under Section 276B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ' the Act '), and under Sections 420 read with Sections 511, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. On the basis of the said complaint, a criminal case was registered and order for issue of process against the petitioners was passed.4. The petitioners appeared in obedience to the process and on June 15, 1984, filed an application objecting to the complaint on the ground that the offence under Section 276B of the Act as provided by Section 279A is non-cognizable and the name of the ...
Grasim Industries Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Collector
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: 1988(36)ELT391(MP)
ORDER1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notice Annexure-1 issued by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Ratlam to the petitioner to show cause why the excise duty amounting to Rs. 2,10,424.50 should not be recovered from the petitioner as the petitioner had evaded payment of that duty.2. The material facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are as follows;The petitioner is company registered under the Companies Act and carries on business at Nagda. The petitioner has an Engineering and Development Division at Nagda, where heavy machinery and their parts are manufactured and sold to other concerns. The Engineering and Development Division at Nagda is registered under the Factories Act as a 'Factory'. On the ground that the petitioner has wrongly availed the benefit of the exemption granted by Notification No. 218/86, which came into force with effect from 24-4-1986, the show cause notice Annexure-1 was ...
Mangilal Kale Vs. M.P.S.R.T. Corporation and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: I(1988)ACC33
R.K. Varma, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimant, son of the deceared against the Award dated 31-10-1984 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shajapur in Claim Case No. 12/83 whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows:On 20-10-1982 the deceased Bhojraj was intending to travel as a passenger in the Guna-Ujjain Passenger Bus bearing registration No. CPH-8594 belonging to the respondent M.P. State Road Transport Corporation and while the bus in question was standing at the bus-stand in village Moman-Badodiya which is on Guna-Ujjain route, the luggage of deceased Bhojraj was put on the top of the bus and in order to check that luggage the deceased Bhojraj climbed up the ladder affixed to the rear portion of the bus. While the deceased was so climbing up, the ladder gave way and the deceased fell down on the ground, sustaining serious injuries which ultimately resulted in his death in...
M.P. Oil Extraction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1987
Reported in: 1990(0)MPLJ675
ORDERB.M. Lal, J.1. This appeal under Order 41, Rule 1(r), Civil Procedure Code is filed by the plaintiff/appellant against the order dated 18-3-1987 passed by the First Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bhopal whereby injunction as sought for against the respondent State of Madhya Pradesh for encashment of Bank guarantee furnished by the appellant in favour of the respondent No. 1, State of Madhya Pradesh for a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs, has been rejected.2. In short, the appellant filed a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and rendition of accounts including claiming various reliefs. Though notice under section 80, Civil Procedure Code was served, yet the appellant felt urgency in seeking injunctio, therefore, an application under sub-section (2) of section 80, Civil Procedure Code was made for taking leave of the Court for granting interim relief in his favour before expiry of the statutory period of 60 days, as contemplated under section 80, Civil Procedure Code.3. ...
Union Carbide Corporation Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP206; 1988MPLJ435
C.P. Sen, J. 1. While hearing Civil Revision No. 224 of 1987, Preferred by the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) against the Union of India (UIO) and others, arising out of interlocutory application No, 19 in the Gas claim Case No. 1113 of 1986, pending in the Court of District Judge, Bhopal, seeking to restrain the Union of India and others from interrogating Section Sundara Rajan, a Senior Instrumentation Engineer and subjecting him to the detector test, the learned single Judge suo motu issued a show cause notice to the parties under Section 24(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as to why the claim cases be not withdrawn from the file of the District Judge and tried in this Court. 2. On the night intervening 2nd and 3rd Dec. 1984, there was leakage of Methyl Isocynate, a highly toxic gas, in the plant of the Union Carbide India. Ltd. (UCIL), resulting in death of over 2500 persons, creating permanent impairments to thousands of persons and affecting a large section of the popula...
Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. (Wvg.) Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-1987
Reported in: 1988(34)ELT562(MP); 1988MPLJ701
1. The order of the Court was delivered by C.P. Sen, J. -This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the Notification No. 170 of 1975-Central Excise, dated 26-7-1975, issued under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 levying excise duty at the rate of Rs. 555/- per metric ton of sulphuric acid of the strength of 93% or more, and claiming refund of the excess amount of Rs. 9,14,050.96 recovered from the petitioner.2. M/s. Gwalior Rayon Silk . was incorporated in the year 1947, under the provisions of the Gwalior Companies Act, 1943, having its registered office at Birla Gram, Nagda, in Madhya Pradesh and is an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner is, inter alia, carrying on the business of manufacture of viscose staple fibre, rayon grade pulp and sulphuric acid. The sulphuric acid is manufactured by the petitioner at its factory at Nagda and the same has, at all material times, been who...
Shastri Brothers Balaghat Vs. Smt. Parwatibai JaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-1987
Reported in: II(1990)ACC161
B.M. Lal, J.1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 thereinafter referred to as the Act), is filed by the non-applicant bus-owner against an interim award dated 9.3.84 whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balaghat in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 92-A of the Act passed an interim award of Rs. 15,000/- against the appellant.2. The short point involved in this appeal is whether the liability to pay interim compensation under Section 92-A of the Act includes the owner of the vehicle alone or it also includes the insurer of the vehicle jointly and severally 3. The facts leading to this appeal are that respondent's No. 1 to 5 brought an action under Section 110-A of the Act claiming compensation against the appellant and respondents No. 6 to 9 on the ground interalia that Chandra Kumar Jain, husband of respondent No. 1 Smt. Parwatibai, while sitting on the pillion of Rajdoot Motor cycle which was being driven by his friend towards Nagpur side f...
Shastri Brothers Vs. Parwatibai JaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-1987
Reported in: I(1988)ACC538
B.M. Lal, J.1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred, to as the Act), is filed by the non-applicant bus-owner against an interim award dated 9-3-84 whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balaghat in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 92-A of the Act passed an interim award of Rs. 15000/-against the appellant.2. The short point involved in this appeal is whether the liability to pay interim compensation under Section 92-A of the Act includes the owner of the vehicle alone or it also includes the insurer of the vehicle jointly and severally 3. The facts leading to this appeal are that respondents Nos. 1 to 5 brought an action Under Section 110-A of the Act claiming compensation against the appellant and respondents No. 6 to 9 on the ground inter alia that Chandra Kumar Jain, husband of respondent No. 1 Smt. Parwatibai, while sitting on the pillion of Rajdoot Motor cycle which was being driven by his friend towards Nagpur side f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »