Madhya Pradesh Court September 1994 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.
Nandram Khemraj Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ83
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. The petitioner is hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhar, in the matter of Criminal Case No. 1041/78 which has been confirmed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar, in Criminal Appeal No. 108/84. The learned C.J.M., Dhar had convicted the petitioner for offences punishable under Section 7(1) read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as Adulteration Act'). The learned C.J.M. had sentenced the petitioner with R.I. for six months and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default further R.I. for three months' for the above mentioned offences.2. The prosecution case, in brief, can be stated as mentioned under :On 5-9-1978 Food Inspector purchased 660 M.L. of milk from the petitioner for the purpose of analysis. The said milk was stored by him in dry and clean bottles as per procedure. One bottle was sent to the office of the Public Analyst ...
Nandram Khemraj Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1270
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. The petitioner is hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhar, in the matter of Criminal Case No. 1041/78 which has been confirmed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar in Criminal Appeal No. 108/94. The learned CJM Dhar had convicted the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 7(1) read with Sections 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'Adulteration Act'). The learned CJM had sentenced the petitioner with RI for six months and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default further RI for three months, for the above mentioned offences.2. The prosecution case, in brief, can be stated as mentioned under:On 5-9-1978 Food Inspector purchased 660 ml. of milk from the petitioner for the purpose of analysis. The said milk was stored by him in dry and clean bottles as per procedure. One bottle was sent to the office of the Public Analyst and two oth...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Udhoji Shri Kishan Das
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ228
ORDERU.L. Bhat, C.J.1. The following question has been referred by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in interpreting the word 'regular assessment' in the light of the rulings of the Calcutta High Court in : [1977]106ITR38(Cal) and the Madras High Court in 126 ITR 1251 ?2. The dispute relates to assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77. The assessee had paid advance tax in instalments during the two accounting years. The Income Tax Officer completed assessment, determining the taxable income and found that the advance tax paid was in excess of the tax assessed. The assessee thereby became entitled to refund. Not being satisfied with the assessment orders, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT (Appeals) who further reduced the taxable income and the tax payable, whereupon further amounts became liable to be refunded to ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Udhoji Shrikishandas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: (1995)128CTR(MP)75; [1996]222ITR736(MP)
1. The Commissioner of Income-tax. Jabalpur, has filed this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. We have heard both sides.2. The dispute arises in relation to the assessment years 1975-76 and 1970-77. The assessee who paid advance tax was allowed refund of a part of the tax paid, by the Assessing Officer and another part by the appellate authority, Interest on the amount of refund was not directed to be paid. The assessee filed separate applications in relation to two assessment years for granting interest under Section 244(1A) of the Act. The Assessing Officer rejected the applications on the ground that the provision quoted was not applicable. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The claim under Section 244(1A) of the Act was not pressed before the appellate authority, who however, directed the Assessing Officer to consider the claim for interest under Sections 214 and 244 of the Act. The Department filed an appeal...
Kamal Rani Vs. Kanhaiyalal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-1994
Reported in: I(1995)DMC565
M.V. Tamaskar, J.1. This Misc. Appeal under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, has been filed against the order dated 21.3.1990 passed by the 1st Additional Judge to the Court of the District Judge, Sagar, in Misc. Case No. 1 of 1986.2. One Heeralal had three sons. During his life time he had partitioned his property between three sons and himself. These three sons are Kanhaiyalal, Ratan Chand and Babulal. Kamal Rani is the widow of Late Babulal and daughter-in-law of Heeralal. Vide Ex. P/l dated 13.7.1971 Heeralal executed a Will in favour of Smt. Kamal Rani of the property shown in Schedule 'A'.3. The Will was scribed by Tulsiram Vyas, who is dead and attested by Mahesh. No attempt was made to obtain, a probate in respect of the properties until the year 1986. Certain proceedings for mutation in the Revenue Court and for partition in the Civil Court were filed after the death of Heeralal in the year 1973. Heralal died on 15.9.1973.4. An application for grant of probate u...
Prahlad Das Chela Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-1994
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ27
ORDERN.P. Singh, J.1. This revision application is directed against the order dated 16-12-1993, passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, in Sessions Trial No. 111 of 1993, whereby cognizance under Section 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for an offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code was taken against the applicant, for suggesting suicide to the deceased Shiv Kumar.2. The prosecution case which has given rise to this revision application are that the applicant and Shiv Kumar since deceased both were in love with one Sushila Bai wife of Megraj Thakur. On 13-6-1992 there was quarrel between the applicant and Shiv Kumar, the two paramours of Sushila Bai over keeping her. In course of the quarrel the applicant said that the matter would be finally settled on the very same day and he taunted at the deceased to go and die. Sushila Bai is also alleged to have taunted at the deceased in the same words. Sometime thereafter Shiv Kumar committed suicide on account ...
Bajaj Tempo Limited Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-1994
Reported in: 1996(55)ECC42; 1997(95)ELT212(MP)
ORDERA.R. Tiwari, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of the Connected Writ Petitions particularised as M.P. No. 1350/88 (National Steel Industries ltd. v. The Collector of Customs and Central Excise and Ors.) M.P. No. 1101 /88 (Indore Steel and Iron Mills Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.), M.P. No. 933/90 (Shree Synthetic Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.), M.P. No. 1076/90 (STI Biplus Tubing (India) Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.), and M.P. No. 932/90 (Reliance Ispat Industries Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.).2. Briefly stated the facts of these petitions are that the petitioners constructed shed with the aid of duty-paid product and material. The shed is built by trusses, columns, girders, purlins, and other articles. The respondents felt that this construction is not fabrication of certain articles as noted above, but manufacture of the said article. They held that the process of subjecting the plates, channels and angles through process of cutting, drilling and welding a...
M.P. Electricity Board Vs. Harnam Singh Iqabal Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ103
ORDERM.V. Tamaskar, J.1. This is a revision against the order passed by the Fifth Addl. Judge to the Court of the District Judge, Bilaspur, in Civil Suit No. 5-B of 1990. A suit was filed by the non-applicant/plaintiff claiming Rs. 1,14,555.52 paise towards to work performed.2. The dispute arose and the plaintiff filed a civil suit. An objection was filed by the defendant/applicant stating that the civil suit cannot proceed in view of the Arbitration Clause. The District Judge rejected the said application stating that the said objection can be taken in a written statement and the issue can be decided as preliminary issue. Against the same this revision has been filed.3. The argument of the learned counsel for the applicant is that such a procedure is not contemplated under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The objection has to be taken before filing a written statement. It has been held in Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Nainsukdas Baldeodas, AIR 1982 Mad. 323, that an application for...
Allahabad Bank, Katni, Jabalpur Vs. M.P. Electricity Board, Rampur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-1994
Reported in: AIR1996MP1
ORDERM.V. Tamaskar, J.1. The order in this revision shall also govern the disposal of C.R. No. 433/93.The controversy in the present revision is regarding the encashment of bank guarantee executed by the plaintiff Bank in favour of M.P.E.B. The plaintiff-Bank had offered security for recovery of the amount under the agreement of supply of electricity to M/s. M.P. Carbide and Chemicals Ltd. The clause of the bank guarantee disclosed that it was an irrevocable bank guarantee to the extent mentioned in the said agreement.2. In Civil Revision No. 432/93 the amount of guarantee is Rupees 20 lacs whereas in Civil Revision No. 433/93 the amount of bank is Rs. 16 lacs.3. The Board filed a suit for performance of the obligations under the guarantee against the applicant Bank. The Bank filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11, C.P.C. for dismissing the suit on the ground that it was barred under Order 7, Rule 11(d) of the C.P.C. i.e. where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to ...
Haji Moosakhan and anr. Vs. M.P. Wakf Board and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP50; 1995(0)MPLJ463
ORDERA.R. Tiwari, J.1. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that petitioner No. I was appointed in 1982 as Mutawalli of Malwa Mill Masjid, Indore. The Committee, consisting of the petitioners and 9 others, named as 'Committee Intizamia Wakf Masjid, 'Malwa Mill' was constituted as per Annexures A and A/1. The petitioner No. 1 was the President and petitioner No. 2 was the Secretary/Treasurer of this Committee. The Committee was constituted for fixed term expiring on 19-5-1990. The respondent No. 1 on 13-3-1991 (Annexures B and B/1) appointed another adhoc Committee and directed the petitioners to handover, the charge to the Committee by order dated 24-3-1991 (Annexure C, C/l). Aggrieved by the aforesaid order (Annex. B) and consequent -- direction for handing over the charge, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking quashment of the order (Annex. B) passed by the respondent No. 1 in favour or respondents No. 2 to 9.2. Respondent No. 1 has filed return. Respondents No. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »