Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
R.K. Organisation of India Vs. Cegat
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1993
Reported in: 1993(44)ECC253; 1993(68)ELT560(MP)
ORDER1. Shri A.M. Mathur with Shri S.K. Garg for the petitioner heard an admission.2. After hearing the learned Counsel and perusing the record, we are of the opinion that the case can be disposed of without notice to the other side, only by making certain directions. The impugned orders of the CEGAT are Annexure P 3 Stay Order No. 03 and 04/93-C, dated 28-12-1992 and Order No. 38 & 39/93-C dated 9-2-1993. The Order No. 03-04/93-C rejects the application under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, in which the prayer for exemption from pre-deposit of the amount involved in the appeal was made. As this order was passed in the absence of the appellant-petitioner, another application was made on which Order No. 38 & 39/93-C (Annexure P 4) was passed.3. Shri Mathur submits that after the exemption was granted under Section 35F for the period 28-2-1986 to 6-12-1990, the rest of the claim is barred by limitation as the show cause notice itself has been given beyond the period of s...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ajay and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1993
Reported in: 1994ACJ987
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Civil Revision Nos. 249, 257, 258, 259 and 260 of 1992.(i) C.R. No. 248 of 1992 arises out of order dated 16.3.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 19 of 1991;(ii) C.R. No. 249 of 1992 arises out of order dated 16.3.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 22 of 1991;(iii) C.R. No. 257 of 1992 arises out of order dated 12.3.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 21 of 1991;(iv) C.R. No. 258 of 1992 arises out of order dated 16.3.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 1 of 1992;(v) C.R. No. 259 of 1992 arises out of order dated 16.3.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 24 of 1991; and(vi) C.R. No. 260 of 1992 arises out of order dated 19.3.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 20 of 1991.All these revisions arise out of the orders referred above passed by XVIth Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore.2. The brief history of the case is that non-applicant Umraosingh owns a tractor attached with trolley M.P. 09.D.693. It is insured with petitioner who is arrayed as respondent ...
Varun Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1993
Reported in: 1993(44)ECC243; 1993(68)ELT722(MP)
ORDER1. This petition involves a short point and in view of the fact that the return has also been filed, it was heard finally and is being disposed of by this order finally.2. The petitioners' grievance is that they have been issued notices Annexures B, C, D and E without specifying as to what was the scope of the enquiry and what was the purpose of the enquiry in which they were called upon to participate. According to the petitioners they will be seriously prejudiced if this Court does not interfere at this stage because the respondents are proceeding on the basis that the petitioners carry on manufacturing process and are manufacturing excisable goods whereas it is not so.3. In response to the notice, by Annexure-F the petitioners have had their say. They have raised certain preliminary objections on the basis that the product manufactured being not excisable, the petitioners are not liable to any duty or penalty. The respondents on the other hand contend that even for deciding whe...
Deora Wire and Wires Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1993
Reported in: 1993(68)ELT771(MP)
ORDER1. Heard Shri J.P. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri B.G. Neema, learned Standing Counsel, who appears on an advance copy of the petition and LA. being supplied to him.2. A very short question is involved in this case and, therefore, it is being disposed of finally at this stage alone. The petitioner's main complaint is against the order dated 18-6-1993 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'CEGAT'), rejecting the petitioner's application for modification of the order disposing of application for exemption from the condition of pre-deposit for maintenance of an appeal before the CEGAT. The petitioner had contended before the CEGAT that after the earlier order, of which modification was sought, was passed, the CEGAT itself in Collector of Central Excise, Bombay v. Nisha Conductors 1993 (21) ETR 520] had decided the point involved in the case and the decision upheld the contention raised by the petitioner in its ap...
Arunodaya Exports Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1993
Reported in: 1993(68)ELT725(MP)
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. Shri Chafekar, Senior Advocate with Shri V.K. Jain for the petitioner. Shri E.G. Neema, learned Standing Counsel for Union of India, appears on an advance copy of the stay application having supplied to him by the petitioner.2. They are heard.3. On the point of jurisdiction of this court a question was posed to the petitioner in view of the fact that the goods in question were unloaded at Kandla Port. Shri Neema, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India submitted that the wordings of Article 226, sub-clauses (i) and (ii) read together clearly indicate that the proper forum for invoking the writ jurisdiction would be High Court of Gujarat. Shri Chafekar, learned Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that after the 42nd amendment even if a part of cause of action has accrued or arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this court, a writ can be issued which can be executed beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, State of M.P.4. In view of the ...
Chintamani Chandra Mohan Agarwal and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1993
Reported in: 1994(0)MPLJ597
ORDERGulab C. Gupta, J.1. The petitioners are tenants of respondent No. 2, a Wakf registered under the Wakf Act, 1954 and feel aggrieved by the Notification dated 7-9-1989 published in Madhya Pradesh Rajpatra of the said date, issued by the respondent No. 1 under Section 3(2) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) ; and challenge the constitutional validity thereof by filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. We must at the very outset regret the non-availability of any help in deciding this writ petition by the respondents. The petition was admitted as long back as on 1-8-1991 and thereafter the respondents were served notices. They were represented by Addl. Advocate General. The respondents have neither filed any return nor have appeared on the last date of hearing when the matter was fixed for final hearing. This Court was informed that since the Advocates of the High Court are boycotting this Court, the office of the Ad...
Raisingh Vs. Amarjeet Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1993
Reported in: 1994ACJ171
R.D. Shukla, J.1. The revision is directed against the order dated 1.9.1990 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (XI/III Addl. District Judge), Indore, passed in Execution Case No. 107/77/88 whereby the non-applicants have been directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,047/- for the complete discharge of compensation awarded to the claimant. The controversy in the case is that in case of deposit by the respondents the amount is to be adjusted towards the interest and costs first or amount deposited should be adjusted towards principal sum.2. In the impugned order the learned Tribunal has directed that the money deposited by the insurance company shall be adjusted towards the principal amount and as such, only rupees referred above have been found due against the insurance company.3. The contention of the learned counsel for the claimant-applicant is that the amount deposited by the insurance company should first be adjusted against the interest and costs and only rest of the amount be adjus...
Khalaniya Bai Diwan and ors. Vs. Narendrapal Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1993
Reported in: I(1994)ACC210; 1994ACJ1306
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. In this revision preferred by the claimants in a case arising out of a motor accident, the only question involved is whether the Claims Tribunal ought to have allowed the application for correcting the alleged inadvertent mistake in the award limiting the liability of the insurance company to the extent of Rs. 50,000/-, when the statutory liability on the date of the accident was Rs. 1,50,000/- under Section 95(2)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.2. The learned Member of the Claims Tribunal in his award passed on 31.12.1990 determined the total compensation at Rs. 1,50,000/- payable to the claimants. The liability of the insurance company has been limited to Rs. 50,000/-. In the award, no reason has been mentioned to limit the liability of the insurance company to the above extent. After passing of the award, the claimants moved an application describing it as a review application read with Section 151, Civil Procedure Code. It was pointed out in that applica...
Ganpat Vs. Amarjeet Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1993
Reported in: I(1994)ACC464; 1995ACJ708
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 17.2.1984 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhar, passed in Claim Case No. Ill of 1980 whereby the claim petition has been dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution of the case by the claimant.2. Brief history of the case is that the claimant (appellant here) filed a claim on 11.12.1980 with the assertions that his father Lalu died due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by respondent No. 2, Kehar-singh, driver of the vehicle, on 26.9.1980 at about 10 a.m. The accident is said to have occurred on A.B. Road near Dhamnod. The case was being adjourned for non-payment of process fee and the correct address of the respondents. A substituted service by publication in the newspaper was directed, vide order dated 17.1.1984 and the case was fixed for 17.2.1984. The claimant did not appear on 17.2.1984. Respondents also did not make their appearance. Therefore, the claim was dismissed in the absence of the claima...
Huka and anr. Vs. Balekhan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1993
Reported in: 1(1994)ACC246
R.D. Shukla, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 14.2.1984 of the M.A.C.T., Jhabua passed in Claim Case No. 62/83 whereby the appellant No. 2 has been awarded a compensation of Rs. 7000/- for having sustained fracture in a motor-accident on 17.8.83. This appeal has been filed for enhancement of the same.2. The brief history of the case is that the claimant Deepa filed a petition before the learned Tribunal through his father-next friend with the assertions that on the date of accident i.e. 17.8.1983 he was sitting on the pillion of the cycle and was going alongwith one Pema towards Thandla. Meanwhile, motor-jeep No. MPZ 4335 driven by respondent No. 1 possessed by respondent No. 2 and owned by respondent No. 3 came from the opposite side. It was in excessive speed. It gave a jerk to the cyclist. The claimant fell down. He sustained injuries including the fracture of the leg. The matter was reported to the police. The claimant was treated in the hospital and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »