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.
Prakash Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ157
ORDERA.K. Mathur, C.J.1. The petitioners by these writ petitions have sought declaration that Constitution (46th Amendment Act) 1982 to the extent it inserts clause (d) in Article 366 deeming leasing without involving transfer of property in goods as sale is void, invalid and ultra vires being in conflict with and opposed to Entry 54, List II of Schedule VII. The petitioners have also prayed that sub-clause (vi) of clause (t) of section 2 and section 9-A of M. P. Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994 may be declared ultra vires the powers of the State Legislature being beyond the scope of Entry 54 of List II of VIIth Schedule.2. Both the writ petitions involve similar question of law and therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order. For convenient disposal of the case, the facts given in W P. No. 4007 of 1995 are taken into consideration. Petitioner No. 1 is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 with registered office situated at 15 K. P. Stone Delhi Road, Hissar, Haryan...
Narendra Singh Gajraj Singh Baghel Vs. Gulab Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1996
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ1057
ORDERS.S. Jha, J.1. This revision has been filed against the order dated 31-7-1995, passed by Third Additional District Judge, Vidisha in M.C.C. No. 7/95.2. A claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed before the Accident Claims Tribunal, Vidisha. It was alleged in the application that the accident occurred on 1-5-1990, which resulted into death of one Shankarlal. Shankarlal died on 10-5-1990 on account of the accident. The claimants/non-applicants are the heirs of Shankarlal. The claim petition was filed before the trial Court under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act on 8-9-1994 along with an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The ground alleged in the application was that the widow of the deceased lost her mental balance and children being minor the application could not be filed in time.3. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the claim petition is not maintainable in view of Sectio...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Chandravati and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1996
Reported in: 1996ACJ1273
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the insurance company under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 16.4.1987 passed in M.A. No. 323 of 1977 (Krishnachand Gupta v. Chandravati).2. The respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the heirs of the deceased Gaya Prasad, had filed claim under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, for compensation in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- on the ground that Gaya Prasad, a passenger in the said bus of whom the respondent No. 1 was the widow and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were the children, had received fatal injuries while going from Satna to Simariya as a result of an accident. It was alleged that a truck bearing registration No. MPJ 5422 was coming from the opposite direction but on account of the rashness and negligence of the driver of the bus in which the said Gaya Prasad was travelling, at the last moment, the driver swerved the vehicle resulting in the bus turning turtle. Gaya Prasad was throw...
Abdul Sattar Vs. Union of India and ors. (Also Chatisgarh Bidi Leaves ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1996
Reported in: (1996)135CTR(MP)352
A. K. MATHUR, C.J. :All the aforesaid writ petitions involve 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. 1059/1996, Abdul Sattar vs. Union of India & Ors. 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 s. 206C of the IT Act. It is further prayed that the circular issued on 10th Jan., 1996 be quashed being violative of Arts. 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 s. 206C of the IT Act or not. The processing ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Agrawal Brothers
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-11-1996
Reported in: [1997]228ITR144(MP)
N.K. Jain, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has on an application by the applicant-Department made under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), stated the case and referred the following question said to be of law for the opinion of this court, arising out of its order dated November 9, 1992, passed in I. T. A. Nos. 143 and 144/Ind of 1988 relating to the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee is an 'industrial undertaking' engaged in manufacture or production of articles or things and thereby holding that it is entitled to deduction under Sections 80HH and 80I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. Briefly stated the facts leading to this reference are thus : The years of assessment involved are 1985-86 and 1986-87. The non-applicant assessee is a registered firm engaged in the business of con...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mohanlal Radhakrishna
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-11-1996
Reported in: [1997]225ITR867(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 proposed question, as extracted below, arising out of the order dated May 15, 1992, passed in I.T.A. No. 87/Ind of 1990, after rejection of the application, presented under Section 256(1) of the Act and registered as R. A. No. 137/Ind of 1992 for the assessment year 1984-85 on November 30, 1992 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered firm. The Income-tax Officer noticed that the sum of Rs. 50,000 was advanced on October 28, 1983, to a sister concern, Suman Oil Mills, vide entry on Rokad Panna 122. This amount was also found credited in the account held in the Bank of India and ...
Municipal Corporation Vs. Chambal Trading Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-11-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ526
ORDERS.C. Pandey, J.1. This is an appeal under Order XLIII, Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 14-12-1993 passed by VII Additional District Judge, Bhopal, in Civil Suit No. 57-A of 1993.2. The respondent No. 1 is a private company. It is owner of Khasra No. 141/87/1/1 and Khasra No. 150/87/1/1. It is also in possession of the land comprised in the aforesaid Khasras. The possession of the temporary constructions on the aforesaid pieces of land are not in dispute. The respondent No. 2 similarly, owns and possesses Khasra No. 147/87/1/1 and Khasra No. 150/87/1/1 and also controls the temporary constructions standing on these lands. The respondents were permitted to construct a boundary wall around these four structures on their lands on 10-6-1987. 3. The respondents pleaded on 16-7-1983 that they filed applications and other documents in the office of the appellant along with maps but the officers/servants of the appellant refused to take these applications. ...
Ambaram S/O Ramaji Kumhar and ors. Vs. Pramilabai W/O Vishwanath and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-10-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ13
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. This order shall dispose of both the revisions Nos. 329/94 and 330/94 which have been heard analogously.2. Suits giving rise to these revision petitions are instituted by the applicants in the Court below seeking reliefs of declaration and permanent injunction. The suits relate to certain agricultural lands which the applicant plaintiffs claim to have purchased from one Vishwanath through a registered sale deed dated 24-5-1987. Earlier one Krishnarao Babarkar had filed a civil suit against the present applicant-plaintiffs, the non-applicant defendant No.1 and one Ku. Gayatri challenging the aforesaid sale deed dated 24-5-1987. The possession of lands was also claimed in that former suit. The suit was dismissed on 17-1-1974 by the trial Court and confirmed in appeal. It appears that the non-applicant No. 1 Smt. Pramila Bai has executed two separate sale deeds of the suit lands in favour of the non-applicants Dilipsingh (non-applicant No. 2 of C.R. No. 330/94) and Sm...
Kanwarlal S/O Chunnilal and ors. Vs. Upayukta, Narcotics, Central Narc ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-10-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ671
ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. In all these Writ Petitions, petitioners seek to challenge the order of the District Opium Officer whereby the prayer made by petitioners for grant of licence for opium poppy cultivation for the crop-year 1994-95 has been rejected. They further challenge the appellate order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Narcotics whereby the appeal preferred by them against refusal to grant the licences for cultivation of opium poppy have been dismissed.2. Applications for grant of licence filed by petitioners have been rejected by the District Opium Officer on the ground that in the crop-year 1993-94 total produce given by them was below 43 K.G. per hectare. The Appellate Authority has confirmed the aforesaid order. According to petitioners, refusal of licence on the ground that the total produce given by them for the crop year 1993-94 is less than 43 K.G., cannot be made a ground for refusal of grant of licence for the crop year 1994-95 unless prior notice is given to...
Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction Vs. Gwalior Syntheti ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-1996
Reported in: [1998]91CompCas514(MP); 1997(1)MPLJ617
T. S. Doabia, J.1. This petition for winding up of the concern by the name of Gwalior Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. is pending in this court since February 5, 1993. This came to be registered with this court under the following circumstances :The directors of the company had filed an application under Section 15(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In this, a prayer was made that the company may be declared and treated as a sick unit and steps be taken for its rehabilitation. On this application, the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'), passed an order on November 9, 1992. It recommended that action be taken under Section 20 of the above Act. It was under these circumstances this petition came to be registered by the registry of this court. Proceedings were initiated for winding up of the company.2. Later on, a prayer was made by the company before the Board that the orde...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »