Madhya Pradesh Court October 1995 Judgments
Ramchandra Gopalji Sugandhi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR647(MP)
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, at the instance of the assessee in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 171 of 1985, concerning Reference Applications Nos. 130 and 129/(Ind) of 1984, referred the undernoted questions of law :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no partition and that the Income-tax Officer rightly rejected the assessee's claim under Section 171 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(ii) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in approving the inclusion of the transferred properties in the assets of the Hindu undivided family for the purpose of levy of wealth-tax for the assessment year in question ?'2. In Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 225 of 1985, concerning Reference Application No. 128/(Ind) of 1984, the Appellate Tribunal referred the undernoted question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right i...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Manju Vs. Sudhir
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-1995
Reported in: II(1996)DMC231
J.G. Chitre, J.1. Heard Mr. V.S. Samvatsar, Counsel for the applicant; Mr. J.C. Yadav for non-applicant. Both of them have been heard.2. Mr. Samvatsar explains the office note which is in respect of the endorsement made in the copy of the relevant document annexed to the petition. Keeping in view the broader approach, the said office note stands dismissed.3. The applicant and non-applicant are wife and husband and presently they are having strained relations because of matrimonial disputes. The wife has preferred the application for pendente lite alimony and for getting the amount for meeting out the expenditure of litigation. The Matrimonial Court passed the order and directed the non-applicant, Sudhir, the husband to give Rs. 1,000/- for meeting out the expenditure of litigation to applicant, Majnu, the wife. The Matrimonial Court also directed non-applicant Sudhir to give Rs. 500/- per month to applicant Manju as pendente lite alimony. The Matrimonial Court also expressed the opinio...
Tag this Judgment!Zakir HusaIn Munshi Khan Vs. Uco Bank and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1995
Reported in: [1996(73)FLR1397]; (1996)IILLJ1018MP; 1996(0)MPLJ304
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. Heard Counsel.The short submission which has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had completed more than 240 days of service and his services were brought to an end without compliance of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for short the 'Act'. The requisite averments have been made in para 9 of the petition. There is no denial to this factual submissions made by the petitioner.2. So far as this Court is concerned, it is settled law that interference can be made under Article 226 of the Constitution and order of rein-statement can be passed in writ jurisdiction if there is non-compliance of Section 25F of the Act. Reference in this regard be made to the decision reported in Mahesh Bhargava v. State (1994-I-LLJ-1113) (MP). In view of the above Division Bench judgment, the contention of the petitioner as to whether he is entitled to reinstatement or not is being examined under Article 226 of the Constitution.3. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Brahmadutt Kedarnath Gupta Vs. Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1995
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ132
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. The order of suspension passed against the petitioner is being challenged. The challenge is made on the ground that the respondents did not serve the charge-sheet within a period specified in the rules. To be more precise, it has been stated that under the rules the charge-sheet is required to be served within forty-five days of the order of suspension. The petitioner places specific reliance on Rule 9(2-a) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966. This rule reads as under :'9(2-a) Where a Government servant is placed under suspension under clause (a) of sub-rule (1), the order of suspension shall contain the reasons for making such order and where it proposed to hold an enquiry against such Government servant under Rule 14, a copy of the articles of charges, the statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour and a list of documents and witnesses by which each article of charge is proposed to be sustained shall...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-1995
Reported in: 2(1996)ACC37
T.S. Doabia, J.1. This order may be read in continuation of the order passed by me on 5th September, 1995. In the said order I had concluded that in appropriate cases it is possible to give relief in accident cares in writ jurisdiction as well. A further direction was given to the District Judge, Gwalior, to hold an enquiry into the matter with regard to determination of the factual position as to whether the buffalo in question had, in fact, died on account of the electric shock sustained as alleged by the petitioner. The report has since been submitted. The District Judge, Gwalior, in his report dated 6th September, 1995 has concluded that the buffalo belonging to the petitioner died on account of the electric shock suffered by it from the leakage of current through the electric wire. The learned District Judge has placed reliance on the statement of the petitioner, Harisingh, and also of the doctor, who performed the post-mortem of the buffalo on 11.8.1995. The evidence of the Board...
Tag this Judgment!Gulam Hasan Vs. Johra Bi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-1995
Reported in: I(1996)DMC348
S.B. Shankar, J.1. The applicant has directed this revision petition against the order dated 21.12.1992 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khargaun in Criminal Revision No. 35/91, modifying the order of maintenance passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khargaun in Criminal Case No. 138/89, decided on 11.12.1990.2. The brief facts of the case are that the non-applicant Johra Bi filed an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khargaun under Section 3(ii) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 claiming the maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month and recovery of the amount of dower amounting to Rs. 5,000/-and the price of the articles given to her at the time of marriage amounting to Rs. 31,664/-. The non-applicant claimed the maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month for the period of Iddat as well as the future maintenance from the date of divorce till the communication of the same to her by the applicant.3. The petition ...
Tag this Judgment!Sugnabai W/O Hariram Vs. Election Officer, Gram Panchayat and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-1995
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ134
ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner in the present Writ Application seeks a direction that she be declared as the duly elected 'Sarpanch' of Gram Panchayat Bamni Bujurga and she has the right to function as such.2. According to the petitioner, election programme was declared by the Election Officer for election of 'Sarpanch' of Gram Panchayat Bamni Bujurga. According to the petitioner, she and respondent No. 4 Smt. Parshadi Bai, have filed nominations for election to the office of the 'Sarpanch'. According to her, she got the highest number of votes and consequently the Election Officer declared her as 'Sarpanch' on 8-6-1994 according to Rule 77 of Madhya Pradesh Panchayats Election Rules, 1994 (hreinafter referred to as 'Election Rules, 1944') and public announcement was made of her election. She has further stated that the result of her election was also published in the Newspaper on 10-6-1994.3. According to the petitioner on 15-6-1994, election of 'Up- Sarpanch' of Gram Panchayat...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Enterprises Vs. Oriental Assurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC179
T.S. Doabia, J.1. Learned Counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the disputed questions of fact with regard to the claim pertaining to insurance cannot be gone into in this writ petition. Is this objection to stand in the way of the petitioner as the 'Great wall of China' which is impregnable and cannot be bypassed even by Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. There would have been merit in this contention of the learned Counsel for the respondents had some disputed facts were required to be gone into. In this petition this is not the situation. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner wants an inference to be drawn on the basis undisputed facts. The position of law with regard to interference in the writ jurisdictions be noticed.3. The question as to whether interference can be made in writ jurisdiction be examined. It be seen that there is enough judicial precedent which does support, the view that interference can be made Under Ar...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Kumar Saraf Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-1995
Reported in: [1997]226ITR860(MP)
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), at the instance of the assessee/applicant with a prayer for a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the ITAT'), to state the questions of law proposed for decision of this court.2. The business premises of the applicant, named, Vijay Abhushan Bhandar, were raided and searched by the Income-tax Department and jewellery and ornaments worth Rs. 1,00,600 were seized. An order under Section 132(5) of the Act was passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Gwalior. The applicant was then served with an assessment order for the year 1986-87. The applicant filed a written reply before the Assessing Officer taking a plea that the jewellery and ornaments seized werethe assets of the ancestral business of the applicant's father. So far as the investment for purchase of one scooter in the assessment year in question was concerned, the stand ta...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Mohd. Sabir,
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR817(MP)
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. These reference applications are filed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Bhopal, under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act'), seeking reference of a common question as extracted below :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no concealment of wealth on the part of the assessee ?'The facts lie in a narrow compass.2. The assessees are the partners of the firm bearing the name and style of Kalekhan Mohd. Hanif, Bhopal. At the time of wealth-tax assessment for 1977-78, the Assessing Officer observed that there was a provision of huge amount in respect of the liabilities under various heads in the account of the firm. He, therefore, made an addition to the extent of the assessee's share in respect of liabilities in the case of the firm. The Wealth-tax Officer also ordered levy of penalty under Section 18(1)(c) of the Act. This was cancelled by the Comm...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »