Madhya Pradesh Court January 1993 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.
Sonibai and ors. Vs. Madhu Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: I(1993)DMC264
A.R. Tiwari, J. 1. This is an application by the wife and two minor daughters, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, claiming twin reliefs of (a) enhancement in the quantum of maintenance allowance and, (b) partial reversal of revisional order 10 as to make the allowance payable from the date of application (21-7-86) instead of order (5-1-90). However, this petition was admitted on the limited point of the date only as is , luclent by order dated 30-7-91 and in view of this position, the question as regards the enhancement stands foreclosed.2. Factual matrix is rather jejune. The applicants filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 500/- p m. on the ground of cruelty and contract of marriage with another woman bearing name as Munnibai. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhar in MJC No. 25/88 ordered on 5-1-90 the non-applicant husband, to pay the allowance of maintenance at the rate of Rs 100/- for eac...
Satish Sanghi Vs. Mihir Kumar Joshi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: II(1993)ACC648; 1993ACJ893
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 4.2.1983 of the End Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, passed in Claim Case No. 195 of 1979, whereby while awarding the compensation to claimant-applicant Mihir Kumar (respondent No. 1 here), the respondent Nos. 2 and 4 have been jointly made liable for payment of compensation to the tune of Rs. 17,333.08 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum.2. The brief history of the case is that on the date of incident, i.e., on 14.5.1979 at about 9.15 p.m. the claimant Mihir Kumar was going on his scooter No. CPF 3318 from Regal Theatre towards Palasia. His younger sister Kamakshi Joshi was sitting on the pillion. The motor car No. MPI 1144 driven by Abdul Salam (respondent No. 2 here) came from the front of Anand Bhawan, M.G. Road. The motor car was in an excessive speed. It dashed against the scooter resulting in injuries to the claimant and damaged the scooter as well. The claimant was ta...
Madhya Pradesh Rajya Parivahan Nigam and anr. Vs. Rajesh Alias Munna
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: 1994ACJ641
R.D. Shukla, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 31.3.1992 of the IV Addl. Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, passed in Claim Case No. 66 of 1988 whereby the respondent has been awarded compensation of Rs. 20,000/- in all.2. The brief history of the case is that respondent was going along with his father Sarjuprasad. He was sitting on the pillion of the motor cycle which was being driven by his father. That motor cycle met with an accident and dashed against a bus owned by the appellant No. 1 here. Sarjuprasad died on the spot. This respondent sustained injuries on his leg and other parts of the body.3. The claim by and on behalf of the legal representatives of Sarjuprasad including this appellant was filed and was registered as Claim Case No. 65 of 1988 and a separate claim was filed on behalf of this respondent-claimant which was registered as Claim Case No. 66 of 1988. Both these claim cases have been decided by one and the same judgment ...
Ramesh S/O Sukhalal Kulmi Vs. Tikam S/O Gopalji Kulmi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1993
Reported in: AIR1993MP140; 1993(0)MPLJ281
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This appeal is directedagainst the Order dated 24-3-83 of IInd Addl.Judge to the Court of District Judge, Dhar,Passed in M.J.C. No. 1/82, whereby theobjection of appellant against the attachmentof the property has been rejected. 2. The admitted facts of the case are that : respondent No. 1 obtained a money decree against the respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 and appellant-objector are father and son. Some agricultural land have been attached in execution of the money decree. The revenue records stands in the name of respondent No. 2 i.e., father. After the attachment of certain agricultural property, which stood in the name of respondent No. 2, an objection was filed by the appellant under Order 21, Rule 58, C.P.C. with the assertion that there has been a partition between the father and son i.e., respondent No. 2 and objector and that the property attached is ancestral property and the same has befallen in the share of objector-appellant. As against it decree-holder...
In Re: Gwalior Strips Ltd.;
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1993
Reported in: [1994]79CompCas178(MP)
T.N. Singh, J. 1. This common order shall dispose finally of two inter-linked petitions under Sections 591(1)(a), 392 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'). On April 5, 1991, in these two quarters, notices were issued to the Registrar of Companies, Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior, and leave to serve the same on Shri N.P. Mittal, standing counsel of that respondent, was allowed. He was heard on June 29, 1991, when the matter was dealt with on that date in accordance with Rule 67 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. A direction was made on that date for separate general meetings of the shareholders of the companies being held to consider the proposal of amalgamation of the two companies filing petitions separately in that regard in these two matters.2. Shri R.A. Raman, advocate, was appointed as chairman of both the meetings. He submitted his report which was accepted and the order dated October 11, 1991, was accordingly passed. He reported that all formalities contemplated ...
Babu Singh Simbhoo Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ433
ORDERS.K. Chawla, J.1. This is a revision by an accused directed against an order of his re-trial.2. The applicant/accused Babu Singh was convicted by J.M.F.C., Bhind of the offence under Section 325, Indian Penal Code on the finding that he had on 17-11-1982 at about 9 A.M. caused injury to the nose of one Chotelal (P.W.1), which was a grievous injury. The sentence inflicted was a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, simple imprisonment for 6 months. It was further directed that Rs. 500/- out of the fine, if recovered, shall be paid to Chotelal as compensation. Aggrieved by that Judgment, the accused filed an appeal in Court of Session, Bhind. Shri R.P. Dubey, IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhind, who heard the appeal, by Judgment dated 4-10-1990, set aside the conviction and sentence of the accused under Section 325, Indian Penal Code but remanded the case to the trial Court for re-trial for an offence under Section 326, Indian Penal Code. It was directed that after the framing of charge unde...
Pyarelal @ Pirva Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ832
D.K. Jain, J. 1. Pyarelal alias Pirva, son of Gorelal Kachchi, aged about 28 years, resident of village Naiguwan, police-station Maharajpur, district Chhatarpur, has challenged his conviction and sentence of (i) imprisonment for life under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code; (ii) rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and (iii) rigorousimprisonment for two years under Section 27 of the Arms Act (sentences were directed to run concurrently), awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in Session Trial No. 116 of 1985, decided on 20-12-1985.2. In short, the prosecution case is that, on 11-6-1985, at village Naiguwan, Ragghu son of Bhaiyalal Kachchi (deceased) was sleeping out side on a cot (Khatiya) near the door of Laxmana Kachchi (P.W.2). Laxmana Kachchi (P.W.2) was also sleeping nearby on his Chabutra. At about 10-11 in the night, the sound of firing of the gun was heard and on hearing his sound the villagers awoke. Ragghu shouted that Pirva h...
Pyarelal Alias Pirva Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ958
D.K. Jain, J.1. Pyarelal alias Pirva, son of Gorelal Kachchi, aged about 28 years, resident of village Naiguwan, Police Station, Maharajpur, District Chhatarpur, has challenged his conviction and sentence of (i) imprisonment for life under Section 302 of I.P.C.; (ii) rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act; and (iii) rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 27 of the Arms Act (sentences were directed to run concurrently), awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur, in Sessions Trial No. 116 of 1985, decided on 20-12-1985.2. In short, the prosecution case is that, on 11-6-1985, at village Naiguwan, Ragghu son of Bhaiyalal Kachchi (deceased) was sleeping outside on a cot (Khatiya) near the door of Laxmana Kachhi (P.W. 2). Laxmana Kachchi (P.W. 2) was also sleeping nearby on his chabutra. At about 10-11 in the night, the sound of firing of the gun was heard and on hearing his sound the villagers awoke Ragghu shouted that Pirva had shot ...
Kwality Products and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 1993(48)LC256(MP)
ORDER1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner seeks to challenge order dated 12.4.1990 (Ann. 'J') passed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Indore Division.2. The Petitioner M/s Kwality Products filed a claim on the ground that the company was entitled to benefit of exemption up to Rs. 15 lacs for each calegorics of heading Nos. 2201 and 2202 under notification No. 175/86. This claim was turned down on the ground that it was barred by time.3. Shri Neema learned standing counsel for the Union of India contends that the petitioner ought to have filed his claim for refund within the statutory time as prescribed. Although learned Counsel was permitted in refuting his. contention by saying that he can point out that the claim as filed was well within time. Be that as it may be.4. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in The Madras Port Trust v. Himanshu International : 1979(4)ELT396(SC) the plea of limitation should not have been invoked by the Assista...
D.H. Secheron Electrodes Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1993
Reported in: [1993]204ITR824(MP)
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. By this petition, preferred under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioners have sought quashment of criminal proceedings initiated under the Income-tax Act and the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of ACJM (Economic Offences), Indore and registered as Cr. Case No. 24/84.2. The facts in brief are :Petitioner No. 1 is a company said to be incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The plant at Indore has been set up by it. Petitioner No. 2 is said to be the managing director of this company at the relevant time whereas petitioner No. 3 is said to be the technical director of the company.It is alleged that there was allegation about concealment of income. It is urged that the debility in such an accusation is demonstrated by the fact that as a result of appeals the level of such amount stood reduced to Rs. 52,88,166 from Rs. 8,67,11,471. It is argued that some infirmity was associated with the assessment orders of different years. It is submitted that ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »