Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
Smt. Vimalabai Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-1996
Reported in: AIR1997MP134; 1997(1)MPLJ227
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. The plaintiff-applicant being aggrieved by order 19-2-92 passed in Civil Original Suit No. 9-B/91 by the learned fifth Additional District Judge, Ujjain, holding that the plaintiff is not entitled to exemption from the Court-fees under Notification No. F.9.83-b-XXI dt. 1-4-1983 published in M.P. Rajpatra (Asadharan) dt. 1-4-1983, page 1068 have filed this revision.2. The plaintiff had filed the suit stating that despite her family planning operation she had conceived and later on delivered a female child. On basis of these facts she sued the authorities under common law for recovery of damages. In the suit she pleaded that her monthly income is not above 400 rupees. The matter was contested even on the matter of Court-fees. The learned trial Court refused to exempt the present applicant basically on the ground that the plaintiff has not stated in her statement/application about the income of her husband as in the opinion of the Court the responsibility to maintain ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jamiyatrai Rajpal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-1996
Reported in: (1998)150CTR(MP)185; [1998]232ITR437(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is an income-tax reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act at the instance of the Revenue and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for the answer of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 27 lakhs representing fine for violation of the Customs and the Imports and Exports (Control) Acts and claimed as business expenditure by the assessee, in spite of the clear cut findings of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Raghubir Prasad Gupta v. CIT : [1979]120ITR789(Cal) ?'2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are thus : The assessee had imported palm kernel seeds weighing 3776.32 mt. The consignment was covered under S.T.C./H.V. D.C. and not under the open general licence.3. The Collectors of Customs, Cochin and Calcutta, had confiscated the con-sigment under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and Section 3(2) of t...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Filter Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-1996
Reported in: [2003]133STC253(MP)
N.K. Jain, J. 1. At the instance of the department, the M.P. Board of Revenue (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), has under Section 44(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (for short, 'the Act') read with Section 13 of the M.P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (for short, 'the Entry Tax Act'), referred following question of law for the opinion of this Court, arising out of its order dated January 13, 1988 passed in Appeal No. 93-IV/85 :'Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue, was justified in holding that the 'wool waste' is included in entry 39, Schedule I ?' 2. The non-applicant assessee deals in manufacture and sale of woollen felts and components made up of wool waste. During the assessment year 1980-81, the non-applicant was assessed at Rs. 15,42,344 the total value of the goods purchased by him during the year. The assessee claimed deletion of Rs. 12,44,826 which, according to him, was the amount spent ...
Anjulla Verma Vs. Capt. Sudhir Verma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-1996
Reported in: I(1997)DMC383
S.C. Pandey, J.1. This is a petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of Civil Suit No. 38-A of 1995 filed by the non-applicant for divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) pending in the Court of IV Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, to Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai.2. The facts of the case are that the non-applicant Capt. Sudhir Verma filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Act against the applicant in the Court of IV Additional District Judge,, Jabalpur. The applicant claims that she had also filed a Petition No. 3-83-95 in the Family Court, Bandra, at Mumbai, on 17.7.1995, as is clear from a photocopy of the certified copy of the order sheet, filed by the applicant. The applicant claims that the divorce petition filed by the non-applicant may be transferred to the Family Court, Bandra/ at Mumbai as she is unable to travel to Jabalpur, with her minor son who is keeping ill. The applicant has...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ram Krishna and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ1134
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the insurance company against the award dated 24.8.1994 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sagar, passed in M.A.C. Case No. 55 of 1992.2. The respondent No. 1, Ram Krishna, son of Durga Prasad Yadav filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs. 13,00,000/- on account of the death of his son Vinod Kumar in an accident caused by truck No. CPV 424 driven by the respondent No. 3 and of the ownership of the respondent No. 2, Shyam Lal. The appellant insurance company was impleaded as non-applicant No. 3 on the ground that the said truck had been insured by the company, under the policy of insurance.3. The case of the claimant was that while his son Vinod Kumar was going on a scooter, on seeing that a truck No. CPV 424 was approaching from the opposite direction at an excessive speed, he stopped his scooter on the side of the road but even then, on account of rash and negligent dri...
Bhagwandas Pawaiya Vs. Kailash Narayan and Bros. (Firm)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ272
ORDERA.S. Tripathi, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the order dated 6-12-1995 passed by the Third Civil Judge Class II, Gwalior in the Execution Case No. 2-A/78 x 95 whereby an objection under Order 21, Rule 23, Civil Procedure Code read with section 47, Civil Procedure Code filed by the petitioner was rejected.2. The decree for eviction against the petitioner was passed in favour of the respondent and it became final upto the Apex Court. During the execution of the decree for eviction of the petitioner, it was alleged by the petitioner-judgment-debtor that he was given two months time to vacate the premises. The execution proceedings were started on 18-2-1995 and eviction warrant was issued against the petitioner. The petitioner filed an objection that the respondent firm in whose favour the decree was passed has been dissolved and as such decree could not be executed. The judgment-debtor/petitioner further alleged that now he has deposited the entire rent in the executi...
Laxmi Narayan Gupta Vs. Janki Ballabh Bhargava and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ574
ORDERA.S. Tripathi, J.1. The only point raised in this revision is that the suit for eviction of the petitioner was not maintainable in the Civil Court, on the ground that one of the landlords, respondent No. 1 was a retired Government Servant and the tenancy was in occupation of the petitioner while the respondent No. 1 was in service.2. The answer to this question depends upon the interpretation of section 23-J of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, (hereinafter, referred to as the Act'). The word 'landlord' has been defined in this section 23-J as a retired Government Servant when the accommodation is already let out during his service tenure, and in that event, a retired Government Servant can move an application for eviction under section 23-A of the Act, only before the Rent Controlling Authority, and no civil suit lies.3. The facts of this case are slightly different. Admittedly, the petitioner/defendant was a tenant in a different portion of the same house. After retirem...
State of M.P. Vs. Mukund Alias Kundu Mishra and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ534
R.P. Awasthy, J.1. Criminal Appeals Nos. 343 and 344 of 1996 preferred separately and respectively by Mukund alias Kundu Mishra and Deva alias Dev Kumar have been filed against the finding of holding them guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 449, 394 read with Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them respectively to Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years, ten years, seven years and to death. The Court has also made a reference under sub-section (1) of Section 366, Code of Criminal Procedure for confirmation of the said sentence of death awarded to the accused. All of the said three cases, i.e. Criminal Appeal Nos. 343 and 344 of 1996 and Criminal Reference No. 1 of 1996 arise out of one and the same Judgment and therefore, all of the said cases shall be simultaneously disposed of by this single judgment.2. Prosecution case is that Smt. Sarita Dubey (aged 24 years) used to reside along with her daught...
Abdul Sattar, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1996
Reported in: [1998]230ITR163(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. All the aforesaid writ petitions involve a common question of law, therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.2. For convenient disposal of all the aforesaid writ petitions, the facts given in Writ Petition No. 1059 of 1996, Abdul Sattar v. Union of India are taken into consideration.3. The petitioner by this petition has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue a certificate in the prescribed form and declare that the purchase of tendu leaves by the petitioner is for the purpose of processing as contemplated under the first proviso to Section 206C of the Income-tax Act. It is further prayed that the circular issued on January 10, 1996, be quashed being violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.4. Having heard counsel and gone through the matter, the question is whether tendu patta which is processed by the petitioner amounts to processing under the first proviso to Section 206C of the Income-tax...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. G.S. Jhamad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1996
Reported in: [1997]227ITR219(MP)
A.R. Tiwari, J. 1. The applicant (Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal), has filed this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), seeking a direction to the Tribunal to state the case and refer the question as extracted below arising out of the order dated March 30, 1990, passed by the Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 653/Ind of 1988 after rejection of the application, presented under Section 256(1) of the Act, registered as R. A. No. 142/Ind of 1990 for the assessment year 1981-82 on June 10, 1991 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that incentive bonus and additional conveyance allowance granted to the Development Officer of the Life Insurance Corporation was not a part of salary and that the assessee was entitled to claim 40 per cent, expenses out of it ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the claim of 40 per cent, expenses from the receipts of incenti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »