Madhya Pradesh Court October 1996 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.
Lalu @ Lalsingh S/O Viramji and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)MPLJ271
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. Shri S. M. Jain learned counsel for the applicants heard.Shri Jain is making a prayer that the order which has been passed by 3rd Additional. Sessions Judge Mandsaur on 26-9-1996 be set aside as it is illegal. He submitted further that by summoning H. C. Rajaram for giving evidence in the said Sessions Trial, the Court is allowing the prosecution to fill up a lacuna. He further submitted that before passing of this order, the prosecution has already closed its case and there was no reason for calling this witness. The trial Court had no right to summon the witness suo motu. He made reference to the certified copy of the order sheet of the relevant dates in that S.T.2. Certified copy of the order sheet shows that on 22-8-1996 the Additional P.P. Shri Dube had informed the Court that the prosecution was closing the evidence. The order sheet also shows that thereafter the Court fixed the case on 26-8-1996 for examination of the accused in view of the provisions of S...
Bansilal Nanda S/O Brindawan Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1996
Reported in: 1998(1)MPLJ365
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. By this petition, under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the correctness, validity and propriety of the orders Annexure-F, dated 4-7-1984 passed by the District Magistrate, Satna and Annexure-I, passed by the Commissioner, Rewa in appeal case No. 20/Arms/84-85, dated 26-11-1984.2. The petitioner applied for grant of a licence of a revolver. According to the petitioner, the licence was required for defence of person and property. After the application was filed, various reports were called for. Superintendent of Police, by his report Annexure-B gave the positive report in favour of the petitioner clearly stating that the petitioner bears good conduct and holds property. The Superintendent of Police recommended the grant. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate called for the report of Tahsildar and after receiving the report found that the petitioner is, having a good financial status, a respectable person and is entitled to hold the arm...
Lalu Alias Lal Singh and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1879
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 26-9-96 passed by IIIrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Mandsaur presided by Shri Shashikiran Tamrakarin S. T. No. 123/94, offence Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. whereby P.W. 12 A.S.I. Mewalal Dube is recalled for further examination, in spite of the fact that P.W. 12 was examined and cross-examined by the defence and on 22-8-96 prosecution closed their evidence, petitioners are filing this revision petition.BRIEF STATEMENT OF FACTS :That petitioners are facing trial Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. in S. T. No. 123/94, pending before the learned Lower Court. That, on 22-8-96, prosecution closed their evidence and the case was posted for Accused's (sic) 9-10-96.Shri S.M. Jain learned counsel for the applicant heard.Shri Jain is making a prayer that the order which has been passed by 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge Mandsaur on 26-9-96 be set aside as it is illegal. He submitted further that by summoning H.C. Rajaram for giving evidence in the said Sessio...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Lalita Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1996
Reported in: 1998ACJ119
N.P. Singh, J.1. This appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 arises out of the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sagar dated 12.4.1990 in Case No. 10 of 1989 awarding interim compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the claimants/ respondents under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 on account of the death of the driver Kashiram in a motor accident on 5.2.1989. It is admitted that deceased Kashiram was driver of mini bus No. MPI 4675 belonging to the firm/respondent No. 6 on a salary of Rs. 750/- per month. The mini bus dashed against a tree in the intervening night of 4/5.2.1989 resulting in the death of Kashiram on the spot. The offending mini bus was insured with the appellant insurance company, The respondents/claimants made an application before the Commissioner for Work-men's Compensation, Sagar for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 78,824/- on account of the death of the deceased, who was a workman, being employed as a ...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Deepam Kumar Patel (See Also Appendices ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1996
Reported in: (1997)137CTR(MP)643
A. K. MATHUR, C. J. :All the cases mentioned in the appendices to this judgment involve similar questions of law. Therefore, these references are answered by a common judgment.2. There are two batches of references : in the first batch, references have been called by this Court under s. 27(3) of the WT Act in respect of cases mentioned in Appendix A to the judgment and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this Court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the CWTs order under s. 25(2) of the WT Act, particularly when the order passed by the WTO was not keeping with Expln. II(ii)(f) of r. 1D of WT Rules for evaluating the break up value of the shares held by the assessee in M/s Delhi Tambaku Udyog (P) Ltd. on the evaluation date ?'3. In the second batch, references have been made by the Tribunal under s. 27(1) of the Act in respect of cases mentioned in Appendix B to this judgm...
Samlu Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-07-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2622
R.P. Gupta, J.1. The appellant has been convicted Under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced toimoprisonment for life videjudgmentdated 16-9-89. The appellant has approached this Court in appeal.2. It was in S.T. No. 75/88 arising out of Cr. Case no. 771/88 of Police Station Maharajpur district Mandla that the learned Sessions Judge Mandla, vide judgment dated 16-9-89, found the accused guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment.3. The incident occured on the night between 27th and 28th March, 1988 in village Newargaon within the jurisdiction of Police Station Maharajpur, district Mandla. Deceased Khimia Bai had become pregnant from the appellant-accused Samlu. This was noticed in a village assembly (Panchayat) held on 11th March, 1988. The appellant had admitted this fact before the Panchayat. Khimia Bai was a blind woman, aged about 35 years, while the appellant was aged about 30 years. Pregnancy was about 28 weeks. The appellant then agreed to keep Khimia Bai in his house, henceforth...
Saida Vs. Masrrat
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-04-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ152
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1. This revision petition filed under section 441-F(2) of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'), is directed against the order dated 29-2-1996 passed by the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Dewas in M. C. C. No. 4/95 declaring the election of the petitioner as Councillor to the Municipal Corporation, Dewas, as void.2. Amongst others the petitioner as also the respondent contested election for the Office of the Councillor of the Municipal Corporation, Dewas from ward No. 5. The petitioner was declared elected on 5-12-1994. The respondent filed election petition against the petitioner under section 441 of the Act challenging latter's election on the ground, one : that she committed corrupt practices, and; two : that she was not qualified to contest the election inasmuch as her name appeared simultaneously as a voter in two wards i.e., Nos. 5 and 7. Court below after taking evidence of the parties and on evaluation thereof negatived ...
Bhailal Bhai Zaver Bhai Patel Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-04-1996
Reported in: 1997(57)ECC70; 1997(89)ELT27(MP)
T.S. Doabia, J.1. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the order passed by the authorities under Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is being challenged. It is not necessary to notice the detailed facts. This is because, the petitioner submits that they paid duty and this duty was not in fact payable. It is submitted that this was paid under a mistake. They accordingly submitted applications for refund. Some of the applications were allowed. Some were dismissed. These were dismissed on the ground that the petitions had been preferred beyond the prescribed period, under the Act. The requirement of law is that an application for refund should be made within six months from the relevant date. It is also not in dispute that these applications were in fact barred by limitation. As indicated above, it was this plea of limitation which was used against the petitioner and refund was not ordered.2. The learned Counsel appe...
Ram Shiromani Mishra Vs. Shiv Mohan Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-03-1996
Reported in: AIR1997MP202
S.C. Pandey, J. 1. This revision isdirected against the order dated 22-9-1995, passed by IIIrd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satna in M.J.C. No. 28/95. The disposal of this revision shall also govern the disposal of two connected revisions, Civil Revision Nos. 1848/96 and 1849/ 96.2. The applicant filed three applications supported by affidavits of even number for setting aside three ex parte awards, dated 4-7-1984, passed against him in favour of the non-applicants in Claims Tribunal Cases No. 126/89, 131/89 and 127/89 respectively. The case of the applicant was that none of the summons in above three cases was served upon him. Therefore, he was unaware about pendency of any claim against him. For this reason he remained absent and three ex parte awards, dated 4-7-1994, were passed against him in his utter ignorance. He received notices for appearance before the Tribunal in respect of the ex parte awards which were sought to be executed by the claimants on 8-2-1995. In th...
Anil Kumar Ojha Vs. Appellate Authority, District Co-operative Land De ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-03-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ597
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. Shri N. S. Purohit, Advocate for the petitioner.Shri A. K. Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondents 2 and 3.Heard.This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred against an order passed by the Chief Executive Officer of Mandsaur District Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd., Mandsaur. This order was subject-matter of adjudication before the authorities constituted under the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The final order under the aforementioned Act was passed. This order was challenged in this Court by filing a writ petition i.e. in M. P. No. 9/80. An argument was raised that this order is not amenable to writ jurisdiction. This argument was repelled. This Court concluded that the appellate order passed would be amenable to writ jurisdiction. This order was held to be bad as it was not a speaking order. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority. The appellate authority h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »