Madhya Pradesh Court April 1987 Judgments
Digamber JaIn Hitopadeshini Sabha and anr. Vs. Narendra Kumar Bukharia ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-1987
Reported in: 1990(0)MPLJ55
ORDERS.K. Seth, J.1. It is not in dispute that the applicant i.e. Digamber Jain Hitopadeshini Sabha, Bina was registered as public trust under the provisions of the M. P. Public Trusts Act, 1951. The non-applicants made a complaint to the Registrar of Public Trusts, Khurai that the trust property was not being properly managed by the President and the Secretary of the Trust and that they were acting contrary to the purpose of the Trust. On this, purporting to act under section 26 of the Act, the Registrar of Public Trusts applied to the Court for directions in the matter. On receipt of the application, the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Sagar at Khurai registered the case as Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 7 of 1983 and proceeded to deal with it under section 27 of the Act. The complainants were arrayed as the applicants in the case. The public trust, through its Chairman and Secretary, was arrayed as the non-applicant. Certain preliminary objections were raised on behal...
Tag this Judgment!Steel Authority of India Vs. Industrial Court and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1987
Reported in: [1986(52)FLR495]; (1994)IIILLJ73MP; 1986MPLJ473
R.M. Rustogi, J. 1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.R. No. 2819 of 1983 Chulhanram v. The Industrial Court, MP. and Ors. M.P. No. 3138 of 1986; Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Industrial Court and Ors. M.P. No. 3139 of 1986; B.K. Chak-raborty v. Industrial Court, Indore and Anr. These petitions are disposed of by a common order as they involve similar questions.2. This is petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash the order of the Labour Court, dated 9.8.1982, Annexure-J, and the order of the Industrial Court dated 27.5.1983, An-nexure-K, in M.P. No. 3138 of 1986 similar orders of the Labour Court and Industrial Court, Annexure-K and Annexure-I, respectively, have been challenged. In M.P. Nos. 2819 of 1983 and 3139 of 1986 the 2 pe-titioners-Chulhanrarm and B.K. Chakraborty have claimed the payment of full back wages.3. We take up first M.P. No. 3137 of 1986. The necessary facts for the disposal of this petition are : The responde...
Tag this Judgment!Badrinarayan Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1987
Reported in: [1988]70STC12(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The material facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are as follows :The petitioner carries on the business of blending tea leaves at Indore under the name, M/s. Quality Tea Industries. The petitioner applied for grant of eligibility certificate for claiming exemption from payment of sales tax in accordance with the provisions of the notification dated 23rd October, 1981 issued by the State Government, in exercise of the powers conferred on the State Government by Section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). By that notification, exemption was granted from payment of sales tax to the class of dealers specified in the notification, subject to the conditions and restrictions set out in the notification. The petitioner contends that though the petitioner fulfilled all the necessary conditions for grant of eligibility certificate under the noti...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Narbharam Popat Bhai and Sons
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1987
Reported in: [1988]170ITR612(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J. 1. The following question of law was referred to this court for its opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') : ' Whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing the assessee's claim for interest paid on the credit balance in the individual account of Shri Prakashchand ' 2. The facts in a nutshell giving rise to the aforesaid question were that the assessee, Narbharam Popat Bhai & Sons, Raipur, is a firm and Prakashchand, son of Narbharam Popat Bhai, is a partner of the firm in his capacity as a karta of the family consisting of himself, his wife and a minor son. The firm paid a sum of Rs. 18,385 as interest to Prakashchand in his individual status. This amount of interest was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer under Section 40(b) of the Act, on the ground that the firm was not entitled to deduction on account of this interest, the same having been paid to a partner. The order of the Income-tax Officer was upheld on appeal by the Commissioner (...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rajni Singh Vs. Santosh Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP260
B.C. Varma, J. 1. This reference under Section 20 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (IV of 1869) is by the District Judge, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 37-A/86.2. Smt Rajni Singh, the petitioner was married to the respondent on 25-1-84. When, according to her she lived with her husband, she found that her husband was incapable of sexual intercourse and was impotent. On complaint by her, the respondent became violent and ill-treated her. Having lived with her husband for about twenty days, the petitioner came back to her house where she communicated this fact of respondent's impotency to her sister-in-law, Smt. Prabha Singh (P.W. 2). She also gave a notice dated 10-2-86 (Ex. P-3) which was not replied to by the respondent. The petitioner, therefore, filed a petition before the District Judge, Jabalpur under Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act, seeking a declaration that her marriage solemnized on 25-1-84 with the respondent be declared null and void. Notice of this petition was served on ...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi Narayan Vs. Madan Mohan and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP142
ORDERT.N. Singh, J. 1. The plaintiff prayed for exemption from payment of court-fee in the trial Court and his prayer was accepted. In doing so, the Court below placed reliance on two Notifications of the State Government, being Notification No.F. 9-1-83-B-XXI, dated 1st April, 1983 (published in Madhya Pradesh Rajpatra (Asadharan), dated 1-4-19831 and No. F 8-5-25-4-84, dated 26th Dec., 1984 (published in M.P. Rajpatra Part I, dated 8-2-1985), hereinafter referred to as Notifications 'A' and 'B' respectively.2. Because Notification 'A' is of immediate and crucial relevance to the controversy the text thereof deserves to be extracted in extenso, with a portion duly emphasized :'In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 35 of the Court-fees Act, 1870 (No. 7 of 1870), the Stale Government hereby remits in the whole of the State of Madhya Pradesh, the Court-fees mentioned in Articles 1-A and 2 of the first schedule and Articles 5, 17 and 21 of the second schedule to the said Act paya...
Tag this Judgment!Alok Awasthi and anr. Vs. Ram Sharma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP253
ORDERT.N. Singh, J. 1. The fact which is not disputed is that the non-petitioner retired as a Chief Municipal Officer of Shajapur Municipality. The only point in dispute is the point of law which, according to me a plain reading of the provision of Section 87(2) of the M. P. Municipalities Act, 1961, 'for short, 1961 Act, should prove decisive of the controversy. If anything more has to be said a reference may be made to the provisions of Section 16 of the M.P. General Clauses Act, 1957, for short, 1957 Act, as also to the Rules framed under the Act, namely, the M.P. State Municipal Service (Executive) Rules, 1973, for short, the Rules.2. The Rent Controlling Authority, for short the authority, has decided as a primary issue, the question as to whether non-petitioner was a 'retired servant of any Government' within the meaning of Section 23-J(i) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (as amended in 1985) for short, Accommodation Act. The authority took the view that the non-petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Revta Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1967
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment dt. 17-8-83 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur at Garoth in Criminal Appeal 'No. J83 of 1982 whereby the petitioner's conviction under Section 7(1) read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act') and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 1000/- passed thereunder have been maintained.2. Circumstances giving rise to the petition are these. On 21-7-79 at about 9 p.m. Food Inspector Atul Bihari obtained sample of cow milk which the petitioner was carrying in three containers. The sample was taken after observing due formalities. It was sent to the Public Analyst, Indore. On receipt of his report that the milk was adulterated, the petitioner was prosecuted with the result already stated.3. A copy of the report of the analysis was sent to the petitioner by registered post and in the absence of any challenge to...
Tag this Judgment!K.P. Govil Vs. Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-1987
Reported in: 1987MPLJ396
K. M. Agrawal, J. 1. In pursuanceof a show cause notice against admission, the respondents put in appearance and on theauthority of Kanti Prasad v. J.N.K.V.Vidyalaya., AIR 1971 Madh Pra 15, raised a preliminary objection (I.A. No. 2484/86) about maintainability of the petition at Gwalior. The objection was first heard by me and brother Rampal Singh, J. in a Division Bench, but instead of deciding it ourselves in a Division Bench, we considered it proper to have the objection decided by a larger Bench in view of its importance and far reaching effect. Accordingly we made a recommendation to Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench for resolving the objection. This is how this Full Bench has been constituted. 2. The petitioner is an Assistant Professor in the Agriculture College, Gwalior run by the Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, (for short, 'the University'). He is aggrieved by his pay fixation and seeks a direction to the University for fixation of ...
Tag this Judgment!Bheraghat Mineral Industries Vs. Divisional Deputy Commissioner of Sal ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-1987
Reported in: 1992(61)ELT560(MP); [1990]79STC156(MP)
C.P. Sen, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order of the Divisional Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jabalpur, in revision, affirming the order of assessment of the Sales Tax Officer, Jabalpur, disallowing the claim of the petitioner for deduction of tax, subject to goods under Section 2(r)(ii) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, and under notification dated October 11, 1977, under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.2. The petitioner is a registered firm, carrying on the business of purchase of dolomite from registered dealers and it is also registered as a dealer under both the Acts. The petitioner purchases dolomite in the form of lumps from registered dealers on payment of tax at full rate within the State. The lumps are then crushed and the chips and powder, which are obtained, are sold to various glass manufacturers within and outside the State. The petitioners follow the calendar year. The relevant period of assessment is May 23, 1981 to ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »