Madhya Pradesh Court March 1995 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.
Kashibai Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1995
Reported in: II(1995)DMC135
Tej Shanker, J.1. Appellant Smt. Kashibai has preferred this appeal against the order of conviction and sentence dated 16.9.1986 passed against her by Shri N.P. Mehar, Sessions Judge, Vidisha, whereby he convicted and sentenced her to a term of five years under Section 304 (Part I) of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution story unfolded from the material on record, runs as follows: Deceased Smt. Loomabai was daughter-in-law of appellant Smt. Kashibai. She alongwith her husband lived with the appellant at Durganagar, Vidisha. Appellant's son Udhamsingh was said to be a thief. On the date of occurrence at about 7 or 8 a.m., Smt. Loomabai came out running from the house shouting for help. Shakoor Mohammed (PW 5), her neighbour, went to her rescue. Her clothes had caught fire. When an inquiry was made from her, she disclosed that her mother-in-law i.e. the accused had poured kerosene oil and set her on fire and escaped. Thereafter, other persons of the neighbourhood assembled and Smt. L...
Trilok Chand Anand Vs. Om Prakash and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1995
Reported in: 1995ACJ1057
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an appeal by the claimant against the award dated 23.11.1990, of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior, whereby the quantum of compensation awarded is sought to be enhanced.2. The facts briefly stated are: In a scooter accident which took place on 12.1.1987, the appellant suffered injury resulting in fracture of his tibia and fibula bones. This resulted in shortening of leg by 2 cm. He took medical treatment for a period of five months. Learned Member of the Claims Tribunal awarded him a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards the disability caused to him by shortening of leg. Separate sum of Rs. 5,000/- to meet special diet and medicine expenses was awarded. Under the head of general damages a sum of Rs. 2,000/- was awarded for pain and suffering. In the manner aforesaid a total sum of Rs. 27,000/- was awarded by the Claims Tribunal.3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant in this appeal claims a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- under the head of permanent disabi...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Laxminarayan Mahawar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-1995
Reported in: [1996]217ITR551(MP)
1. The following question of law has been referred to this court by the Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue under Section 26(1) of the Gift-tax act, 1958 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not liable to pay gift-tax ?'2. The assessee is a partner in a firm. Initially, he had a 20 paise share in the firm. In the assessment year in question, there was a change in the constitution of the firm and new partners who introduced share capital were admitted. Consequent on the change in the constitution of the firm, the assessee's share in the property of the firm was reduced from 20 to 10 per cent. The Gift-tax Officer held that the assessee had surrendered a moiety of his share in favour of the incoming partners and this constituted gift. He valued the gift at Rs. 44,650 and completed the assessment. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on an appeal filed by the assessee, allowed ...
Grasim Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-1995
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ921
ORDERU.L. Bhat, C.J.1. Petitioner is a company having, among many other things, a cement factory at Khor in Mandsaur district. Petitioner requires coal for the manufacture of cement and purchases the same from 11th respondent Coal India Limited or one of its subsidiaries, namely, respondents 6 to 10. Petitioner has filed this writ Petition seeking to declare Clause 161-B of the Goods Tariff No. 39 Part-I, Volume-I as ultra vires and unconstitutional and for direction for refund of penal freight charges collected by the railway administration from the Petitioner.2. Coal is purchased by the Petitioner from Coal India Limited or one of its subsidiaries. The coal is conveyed from the pit-heads to the Petitioner's factory by the railway administration. Railway administration allots wagons to the consignor and places the wagons at the disposal of the consignor at the respective rail head or loading point within the jurisdiction of the colliery concerned. The consignor loads the wagons. Loadi...
Narayan Singh and anr. Vs. Rajaram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: AIR1995MP200; 1996(0)MPLJ959
ORDERJ.C. Chitre, J.1. Heard Shri Shailendra Mukati counsel for the petitioners; Shri R. C. Chazed, for the non-applicants. This revision is decided finally as prayed by counsel.2. The day on which the suit was proceeded against the applicants ex parte, was obviously a day of monsoon. It is also eloquent from the order which is the subject matter of challenge that it rained heavily on preceding day. The learned Judge has pointed out in his order that according to him that was not the time proper for sowing. The sowing operation is dependent on various factors and there cannot be hard and fast rule specifying the time when an agriculturist should carry on sowing operation.3. It is true that a Judge should do a satisfactory work in the month; but that does not mean that in proper cases proper opportunity should be denied to the litigants. The Judge could have taken another matter which was listed for hearing on daily board. A reasonable approach has to be taken and the justice should not...
Rameshwar Prasad Purushottamlal Gupta Vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ198
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner who was a member of the Madhya Pradesh State Judicial Service holding the post of Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Sehore at Sehore has challenged the order dated 28-8-1993 (Annexure-A) passed by the State Government in exercise of the powers under Fundamental Rule 56(3) as amended by the Madhya Pradesh Shaskiya Seva (Adhivarshiki Aayu) Sanshodhan Adhiniyam, 1993, of compulsory retirement in public interest on completion of age of 55 years.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are these : the petitioner, whose date of birth is 10-11-1937 on his selection by Public Service Commission, joined the service in M. P. State Judicial Service as Civil Judge, Class II in the year 1972. The petitioner was promoted on the post of Civil Judge, Class I in the year 1983 and as Chief Judicial Magistrate, vide order dated 12-12-1990; and, as a member of the Higher Judicial Service ...
Somti Bai and ors. Vs. Mishri Lal Chhoudhary and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: 1995ACJ1233
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. A common order is being passed in this appeal, Misc. Appeal No. 142 of 1989, and in appeals, Misc. Appeal Nos. 143 and 144, both of 1989, all preferred by the claimants against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shivpuri, passed on 25.9.1989 in relation to an accident to truck No. MPW 4832.2. Facts not in dispute are-that truck No. MPW 4832 while carrying in its body labourers overturned on 5.4.1984 some time in the midnight in which two labourers, by name Hotam and Harvilas, died and the third Deo Pal suffered injuries resulting in fractures of his bones. The Claims Tribunal awarded to the claimants of the deceased in each case a compensation in the sum of Rs. 28,000/- and a sum of Rs. 12,000/- to the injured labourer, Deo Pal. The Claims Tribunal held only owner and driver of the vehicle jointly and severally liable for payment of compensation. The Tribunal totally absolved the insurance company from any liability by holding that the three abov...
Sangita Vs. Narendra Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-1995
Reported in: 1997ACJ861
A.S. Tripathi, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 23.11.1991 passed by the presiding Judge of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhind.2. By the impugned order the Tribunal had refused to grant interim compensation under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on the ground that no permanent disability was proved by the petitioner.3. This petition was earlier presented as writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The question arose as to whether an appeal will lie against the impugned order or only a writ petition could be preferred. On this point when the matter was heard by the Division Bench, there was a difference of opinion between the two Judges of this Court hearing the writ petition. Brother R.C. Lahoti, J. had expressed the opinion that an appeal will lie against the impugned order under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the writ petition was not maintainable and the same was dismissed. Brother, KM. Pandey, J. had dif...
Bhagsingh and anr. Vs. Sunita and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-1995
Reported in: I(1995)DMC584; 1995(0)MPLJ1037
C.K. Prasad, J.1. The petitoners have filed this application against the Order dated 29-10-1994 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh (Biora) in Criminal Case No. 936/92 whereby the prayer made by the petitioners that the Learned Magistrate has no jurisdiction to entertain the case, on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction, has been rejected, The Learned Magistrate has also directed that the prayer made by the petitioners for dispensing their personal attendance, shall be considered, after they appear before him.2. I have heard the Counsel for the petitioners as also Shri G. Desai Government Advocate, appearing on-behalf of the N.A. No. 2 and this application is being disposed of at the motion hearing stage itself.3. N.A. No. 1 Sunita filed a complaint in the Court of C.J.M. Rajgarh stating therein that she is the resident of Rajgarh and the accused persons namely petitioner No. 1 is her husband, petitioner No. 2 is her father-in-law, petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are her...
Bhagsingh and ors. Vs. Sunita
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-1995
Reported in: II(1995)DMC240
C.K. Prasad, J. 1. The petitioners have filed this application against the order dated 29.10.1994 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh (Biora) in Criminal Case No. 936/92 whereby the prayer made by the petitioners that the learned Magistrate has no jurisdiction to entertain the case, on ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction, has been rejected. The Learned Magistrate has also directed that the prayer made by the petitioners for dispensing their personal attendance, shall be considered, after they appear before him.2. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the petitioners as also Mr. G. Desai, Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the N.A. No. 2 and this application is being disposed of at the motion hearing stage itself.3. N.A. No. 1 Sunita filed a complaint in the Court of C.J.M., Rajgarh stating therein that she is the resident of Rajgarh and the accused persons namely petitioner No. 1 is her husband, petitioner No. 2 is her father-in-law, petitioner No. 7 is her ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »