Madhya Pradesh Court December 1988 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.
Kailashkumar and anr. Vs. Seventh Additional Judge to the Court of Dis ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-01-1988
Reported in: AIR1989MP237; 1989MPLJ48
S.K. Dubey, J.1. The petitioners, who are tenants, by this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India have prayed for quashing of order dated 8-2-1988 passed by the 8th Additional Judge to the Court of the District Judge, Indore, in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 16/87. Whereby the Appellate Court refused to set aside the ex parte decree dated 23-4-1987 in Civil Suit No. 9-A/87, passed by the 7th Civil Judge, Class II, Indore.2-3. Brief facts leading to this petition are that the respondent No. 3 filed a suit for ejectment from the suit premises. The case was fixed for filing written statement on 8-4-1987, hut the petitioners did not appear hence, the Court ordered to proceed ex parte against the petitioners defendants. On 9-4-87, the petitioners' counsel appeared in the Court Where he came to know that the case has already been ordered to proceed ex parte against the defendants. The petitioners through their counsel filed an application under Order 9, Rule 7 of the Code of C...
Prahlad Dal Mill and ors. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-01-1988
Reported in: [1990]79STC62(MP)
K.M. Agarwal, J. 1. This order shall also dispose of Misc. Petition No.1508 of 1981, Sudhamalal Darshanlal and eight others v. State of M.P. and another and Misc. Petition No. 47 of 1982, Rampal Ramgopal and 4 others v. State of M.P. and two others.2. In all these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners pray for striking down the amendments made by Madhya Pradesh Act No. 33 of 1981 in the Madhya Pradesh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (in short, the 'Entry Tax Act') and claim exemption from payment of entry tax on whole pulses brought into a local area for sale outside the State, or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce after manufacturing split pulses, besides claiming other ancillary reliefs. The amending Act No. 33 of 1981 was given retrospective effect.3. The incidence of taxation is given in Section 3 of the Entry Tax Act. Prior to the impugned amendment, Clause (v) of the first proviso to Section 3(1) read as follows :'...
Mamchand Sharma and anr. Vs. Collector of Customs and C.E. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-01-1988
Reported in: 1990LC120(MP); 1989(40)ELT42(MP)
ORDER1. The petitioner No. 1 in this petition carries on business of stitching HDPE Woven sacks and petitioner No. 2 carries on the business of printing HDPE woven sacks. According to the petitioners, they received from their customers HDPE fabrics for stitching HDPE woven sacks and then do the job of printing on the stitched sacks. The petitioners are paid only for the job work of stitching and printing done by them. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, by Notification No. 223/86-C.E., dated 3.4.1986, exempted woven sacks of Polymers of ethylene or propylene or its combination thereof, falling under the heading No. 46.01 or 63.01 of the Schedule from the whole of the duty of Excise specified in the said Schedule. The aforesaid notification was amended by Notification No. 453/86-C.E., dated 20-11-1986 by which a provision was added to the aforesaid notification, whereby the exemption contained in the not...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›