Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sanmati Forest Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1996
Reported in: [1998]233ITR163(MP)
ORDER--Intimation under s. 143(1)(a)--Amendment of s. 246(1)(a), w.e.f. 1-6-1994--Assessment year 1990-91Ratio & Held :Intimation sent under section 143(1)(a) for the assessment year 1990-91, on 16-5-1991 was appelable under section 246 because the amendment made in section 246(1)(a), with effect from 1-6-1994, making an intimation under section 143(1) or 143(1B) appelable, is clarificatory in nature.Application :Not to current assessment year.A. Y.:1990-91Income Tax Act 1961 s.246 ...
Mahila Asha Vs. Gopalbabu Namdeo
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1996
Reported in: I(1997)DMC586
Tej Shankar, J.1. Two points have been raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner in this revision petition arising out of proceedings Under Section 125, Cr.P.C.2. It appears that a petition was moved by Mahila Asha Under Section 125, Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance to herself and her son. The petition was allowed by the learned Magistrate and a sum of Rs. 500/- was awarded as maintenance for the wife and another sum of Rs. 500/- to the son from the date of the application. A Revision petition was preferred by the present respondent Gopalbabu. The revising Court partly allowed the revision petition by its order dated 27.7.1994 and reduced the amount of maintenance to the son to Rs. 400/- and directed that the amount be paid from the date of the order of the learned Magistrate instead of date of the application. The wife, original petitioner, Manila Asha has preferred this petition.3. The contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner are that the learned Revising Court has wrong...
Pramod Kumar Agrawal Vs. Sandeep Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ1428
S.K. Dubey, J.1. For the death of one Krishna Kumar Mishra, aged about 45 years, arising out of the use of truck No. MBA 4266 owned by Pramod Kumar, driven by Gangaram and insured by the Oriental Insurance Company, occurred on 31.12.1986, the legal representatives of the deceased, that is, widow Chandra Rani Mishra and 3 sons, filed an application for compensation and claimed Rs. 3,12,000/- with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the application. It was averred that the deceased was employed in Government service in Education Department and was drawing Rs. 1,900/- per month who died in motor accident due to rash and negligent driving of the truck. The owner, driver and insurer contested the claim. The insurance company also submitted that its liability was limited up to Rs. 1,50,000/-. The Tribunal after appreciation of the evidence adduced by the parties, held that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the truck. For award of compensa...
Akhilendu Arjaria and ors. Vs. Banarasidas and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ376
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. 'We, the people of India', solemnly resolved to constitute ourselves into a 'Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic.' It was resolved to give justice and equality to all. Having been ruled by a foreign power for more than two centuries it was thought apt to include a chapter of Fundamental Rights in the Constitution which we gave to ourselves. Attainment of 'Liberty' in all spheres was thought as an imperative goal. The Courts have been enforcing these fundamental rights only. Some how or the other it was felt that we were concerned about our rights only. We absolutely forgot that we owe a duty to this Nation also. It was precisely for this reason in 1976, a chapter dealing with 'Fundamental Duties' of the citizen of this country was incorporated in the Constitution. Part IV A was added by 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976. Article 51A which was so added prescribes a duty for every citizen of India 'to protect and improve the natural environment in...
Pawan Verma Vs. Rajendra Saran and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ177
ORDERS.C. Pandey, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the orders, dated 7-7-1995 and 18-7-1995, passed by the IIIrd Additional Judge to the Court of the District Judge, Bhopal in M.J.C. No. 47/1995. The Court below has held that Yamini Verma is a necessary party in the aforesaid case.2. The relevant facts, that give rise to this petition, are hereinafter stated in short. The petitioner filed a petition for the custody of the female child named as Priyanka P. Verma, renamed as Mallika Verma, against the respondents. This petition was filed in the Court below, under section 25 of the Indian Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter 'the Act'). In this petition, it was alleged that the petitioner got married with Yamini Verma at New Delhi on 27th June 1990 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. As a consequence of that marriage, the child, named above, was born on 23 July, 1993. The petitioner claimed to be the father of the female child. Yamini Verma was admitted to be h...
Dr. Doma Alias Devendra Kumar Vs. Sheikh Hasan Alias Shabboo Master an ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ893
S.K. Dubey, J.1. M.A. No. 159 of 1990 has been filed by the injured claimant whose application for compensation filed in Claim Case No. 16 of 1988 has been dismissed by award dated 15.3.1989 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chhindwara. M.A. No. 224 of 1989 has been filed by the legal representatives of deceased Amar Lal who were awarded only Rs. 15,000/- on the principle of 'no fault liability' in their application filed in Claim Case No. 15 of 1988 by common award dated 15.3.1989 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chhindwara.2. Facts giving rise to these two appeals are thus: On 19.11.1987 at about 9.00 a.m. one jeep No. MKJ 8881 owned by respondent No. 1, driven by respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3 was going from Parasia towards Chhindwara. From the opposite direction near Kulbahra river the appellant Dr. Doma was coming on his motor cycle on which the deceased Amar Lal was sitting as a pillion rider, both vehicles collided as a result of which the motor...
Sharda Chopra and ors. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1996
Reported in: AIR1997MP196; [1998]91CompCas605(MP); 1996(0)MPLJ1001
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. The players to the game are bound by the Rules of the game. This is more so in the case of a referee, who is instrumental in laying down the Rules. Stale Bank of India is in the position of a referee. It has laid down certain norms, which deal with the method and manner in which the articles kept in (he bank's safe deposit locker are to be dealt with. The instructions on the point have been made available by Shri A.M. Naik, Advocate appearing for the State Bank of India. Before noticing the facts and legal position, it would be apt to notice these instructions.'6.4. Return of articles kept in the bank's safe deposit vault/scaled boxes.- (i) In the case of articles in Slate Deposit Lockers/sealed boxes in safe deposit, an inventory should be prepared in the presence of two officers of the branch and two independent witnesses. In appropriate cases, the services of a notary, if available may also be availed of, as an independent witness. (ii) A stamped letter of ind...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mansukhlal Prahjibhai and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1996
Reported in: [1997]227ITR429(MP)
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court, as arising out of the order dated February 13, 1992, of the Tribunal in ITA No. 641/Nag. of 1987, for the assessment year 1985-86 :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who deleted the addition of Rs. 1,12,269 made by the assessing officer by disallowing the liability towards Mandi tax payment by invoking the provisions of Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in law to hold that Mandi tax was a fee and as such fell outside the purview of the provisions of Section 43B ?3. Whether the Tribunal was correct in law to hold that the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakhanpal National Ltd. v. ITO : [1986]162ITR240(Guj) and the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Trib...
Mahendra Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1996
Reported in: [1997]226ITR718(MP)
1. The petitioner has by this petition challenged the validity of the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984, whereby Sub-section (3) of Section 80L has been introduced with retrospective effect, i.e., April 1, 1976. The petitioner has also prayed that the assessment for the assessment year 1985-86 may be declared illegal. He has also prayed that the penalty proceedings initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961,for imposition of penalty for the said period of assessment should be quashed. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act as illegal.2. The brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner is an assessee. He was assessed to income-tax by respondent No. 2, ITO B-Ward, Ujjain. The sources of his income are house property and share income from three partnership firms, namely, Babulal Porwal, Ujjain, Harishchand Ashok Kumar, Ujjain and Sharad Textiles Agency. During the assessment year 1985-86, he also...
P.C. Rajput Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ102
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J. 1. Petitioner is a contractor, who has filed this revision under section 19 of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (for brevity the Act') against the award dated 30-11-1992 passed in Reference Case No. 73 of 1990 by the M. P. Arbitration Tribunal Bhopal (for short the 'Tribunal').2. Facts giving rise to this revision are these :The petitioner was awarded a 'works contract' by the respondent on 26-10-1993 for construction of masonry structure on the right Bank of the Main Canal of Kolar project in Km. 6 to 11 including the gap filling in masonry structure. The work also included construction of five road bridges. The period of completion of contract was stipulated as 12 months by 26-10-1984 from the date of issue of the work order, i.e. 27-10-1983. The petitioner could not complete the work even in the extended period, therefore, the contract was terminated on 20-3-1986. The respondent served a notice Ex. D/7 dated 1-4-1986 to hand over the cemen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »