Madhya Pradesh Court July 1987 Judgments
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Hariram Chouhan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC437(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. The Tribunal, constituted under the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has referred to this Court under Section 44(1) of the Act, the following question for its opinion :Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no penalty under Section 43 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, can be levied, where a dealer has not furnished any return as prescribed under the Act ?2. The statement of the case as also the orders of the Sales Tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, indicate that for the accounting year, 1969-70, the assessee-opposite party has filed a return for the quarter between 10th November, 1969 and 7th February, 1970, but for the remaining three quarters, however, no return was filed. The Sales Tax Officer, in regard to the quarterly return that had been filed, found that it was false and on that basis levied a penalty of Rs. 3,600 under Sectio...
Tag this Judgment!Jumma Vs. Birja
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP276; 1987MPLJ710
ORDERT.N. Singh, J. 1. This application under Section 23A of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, for short, the 'Act', has raised two important questions of law. Indeed being conscious of this position and conscious also of the fact that decision to be rendered in this matter was likely to affect both pending and future applications of the same nature, I heard counsel at length on different dates. I commend the resourceful assistance which I received from them in this matter which I propose to dispose of finally today, here and now.2. The questions formulated are as follows : --1. Whether Section 23A, in terms, contemplates that relief thereunder can be available only in respect of an accommodation which, on the date of the application, is in occupation of a 'tenant' and the Rent Controlling Authority (for short, the 'Authority') shall have no jurisdiction to try and dispose of the application when the applicant fails to establish subsisting tenancy of the non-applicant...
Tag this Judgment!Mamoodkhan Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ635
V.D. Gyani, J.1. By this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the effect that the Addl. Sessions Judge, Shajapur, be directed not to send the petitioner to jail as he has already undergone more than six months' imprisonment as an under-trial prisoner. The petitioner has also made an application for interim relief, praying for stay of the order dated 4-7-1987, passed by the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Shajapur. It was in view of this interim prayer that we thought it proper to hear the petition and requested the learned Government Advocate to take notice, to which he readily agreed.Shri Jaisingh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Surjeetsingh, learned Government Advocate for the State respondent are heard.2. Short facts are that the petitioner Mamcodkhan was convicted by the trial Court for offences punishable under Sections 147, 302/149, 326/149, 324/149 and Section 323, I.P.C. The petitioner preferred an appeal before this Court, be...
Tag this Judgment!Satyendra Prakash Tiwari Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, M.P., ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1987
Reported in: AIR1987MP257
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. This letters patent appeal has been preferred against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court dated 30th November, 1985 in Misc. Petition No. 298 of 1985. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal in a nutshell are that applications for grant of stage carriage permit on Guna Sironj route were invited by the Regional Transport Authority. It appears that four applications were made, one by Moulana Bus Service, the other by Ved Sagar Sood, the third by Satyendra Prakash Tiwari and the fourth by M/s. Shakti Transport Service. The application of Moulana Motor Service was allowed on 24th August, 1977 and permit was issued accordingly to Moulana Motor Service for three years. Aggrieved by the order dated 24th August 1977, Ved Sagar Sood, Satyendra Prakash Tiwari and M/s. Shakti Transport Service preferred appeals before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, being Appeals Nos. 308 of 1977, 331 of 1977 and 333 of 1977 respectively. During the pendency ...
Tag this Judgment!Thana and ors. Vs. Bhagwanlal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP285; 1988MPLJ279
T.N. Singh, J. 1. The short point to be decided in this case is interpretation of the term 'debt' of the definition Clause (d) of Section 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Gramin Rin Vimukti Tatha Rin Sthagan Adhiniyam, 1975, for short, the Adhiniyam. 2. Few facts, to be stated to appreciate background of the instant lis, may be recounted shortly. Admittedly, each of the appellant is a 'marginal farmer' defined in Clause (g) of Section 3 and each of them is also a'member of scheduled caste' defined in Clause (h) thereof. They had instituted a suit for declaration of their title in respect of some land, which was dismissed but they were saddled with costs which were assessed at Rs. 152.30 paise. The successful defendants, the respondents herein, levying execution of that decree for costs, the appellants raised objection invoking the protection of the Adhiniyam. The Executing Court allowed the objection but on appeal the decision being reversed the plaintiffs, who are also judgment-debtors, are be...
Tag this Judgment!Auto Sales (Bombay) Vs. Additional Sales Tax Officer, Flying Squad and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC252(MP)
ORDERG.G. Sohani, J.1. As directed by this Court under Section 44 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 the case, the order of remand passed by the Board of Revenue is illegal 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows :The assessee deals in motor parts, fuel ejection pumps, etc., at Indore and is assessed to tax as a dealer under the Act. For the period from 1st April, 1970 to 31st March, 1971, the assessee disclosed in its return gross turnover at Rs. 3,73,969. The report of the investigation by the Flying Squad revealed that the Manager of the assessee-firm had furnished some papers and diaries, which disclosed transactions, which had not been entered into the account books of the assessee. The assessing authority, however, came to the conclusion that ther...
Tag this Judgment!Nekram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1010
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'the Code') directed against the order dated 2-4-1986 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Biora, District Rajgarh in Cr. Case No. 305/83 relating to an offence under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code.2. Circumstances giving rise to the application are these. In the aforesaid case on the hearing dt. 19-7-85 the petitioner was not represented before the learned Magistrate by a lawyer and four witnesses had been examined. Subsequently a lawyer appeared , for the applicant and after inspecting the record, submitted an application praying that the four witnesses already examined be recalled.3. The learned Magistrate rejected the prayer made in the application.4. Revision filed against that order (vide Cr. Revision No. 43 of 1986) was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajgarh on 24-9-1986 as not tenable. In so doing the learned Additional Sessions Judg...
Tag this Judgment!Badrilal Jodhraj and Sons Indore Vs. Girdharilal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP24
V.D. Gyani, J.1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the orders, Annexures-2 and 3, passed by the District Judge, Indore (respondent No. 2) in Civil Revision No. 15 of 1985.2. Short facts necessary for disposal of this petition are that the petitioner-firm filed Civil Suit No. 55-B of 1981, in the Court of VI Civil Judge, Class II, Indore against respondent 1 for recovery of Rs. 2860/- on the basis of a promissory note, executed by respondent 1. This suit was dismissed by the trial Court, vide its judgment and decree dt. 3-8-1984, holding that the promissory note in question was without consideration. The petitioner preferred an appeal, which was registered as Civil Regular Appeal No. 5-B of 1985. This appeal came to be heard by Shri S. K. Pandey, Addl. Judge to the Court of District Judge, Indore, who by his judgment and decree dt. 11-4-1985 allowed the appeal and decreed the petitioner's claim. This judgment and decree has been f...
Tag this Judgment!Keveyan and Co. Vs. G.S. Bagehal, Additional Assistant Commissioner of ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-06-1987
Reported in: [1988]68STC308(MP)
G.G. Sohani, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed that the order of assessment dated 31st December, 1986 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore, be quashed. The petitioners have also prayed for issuance of an ad interim writ restraining the respondents from recovering the tax and the penalty imposed by the impugned order.2. A preliminary objection is raised on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner has a right to prefer an appeal before the prescribed authority under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and as the Act provides for a complete machinery to challenge an order of assessment, the impugned order of assessment can only be challenged by the mode prescribed by the Act and not by a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. Before we proceed to appreciate the contentions raised by the parties in this behalf, it would be us...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Bharose Vs. the New India Insurance Company Limited and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-06-1987
Reported in: II(1987)ACC191
T.N. Singh, J.1. Respondents' counsel Shri Lahoti submits that this is not the case in which any consideration is deserved by the appellant and the prayer in the appeal for enhancement in the quantum of the award is misconceived.2. I have no doubt that counsel is right to th-3 extent that decisions which are cited before me in some cases take the view that for injury caused to the nose in a motor accident, the claim could be validly settled of Rs. 5,000/-, but needless to state that each case has to be decided on its own facts and a single yard-stick in such cases can hardly do justice to all cases of all natures.3. Indeed, I see much force in the submission of appellant's counsel that the award is made mainly for the injury which the claimant/appellant suffered with respect to his nose in that there was a fracture of a bone of the nose which was accordingly disfigured permanently. It is counsel's submission relying on the evidence of Doctors, CW 4 and 5, that the claimant also suffere...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »