Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Umesh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1369
R.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1-10-1991 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaspur Nagar, Raigarh, in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 1990, arising out of Crime No. 10/90 of Police Station Jaspur Nagar, Raigarh. The appellant was convicted for having committed an offence under Section 394 read with Section 397 for committing robbery by use of dangerous weapon. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years.2. The learned trial Court found it established against the accused that he, on 19-1-90, in the house of Vinod Kumar Jain, P.W. 1, had looted gold ornaments from the person of Smt. Sanjana Jain, wife of Vinod Kumar Jain, in her own room at point of knife, threatening to kill her.3. Brief facts of the case are that the accused had illegally entered the house and had entered the room of Smt. Sanjana Jain. The time was about 6.25 p.m. Sanjana Jain, her mother-in-law and sister-in-law were watching TV in a room on the ground floor, while her husband Vi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dogar Tools Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR616(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), at the instance of the Revenue and the following two questions have been referred for answer by this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 of the Act and restoring the order of the Assessing Officer ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law to hold that the nssessce was entitled to carry forward of losses to later years in spite of the amendment made toSection 80 of the Income-tax Act with effect from the assessment year 1985-86 ?' 2. The brief facts giving rise to this reference are these : The assessee, in its return, declared a loss of Rs. 8,45,397. This return was not filed within the time allowed under Section 139(1) of the Act. It was due to be filed on June 30, 1985...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Marjinder Kaur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1996
Reported in: [1997]226ITR408(MP)
1. This is an income-tax reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue and the following three questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this court :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law to hold that there was no good reason or new fact to interfere with the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who directed to allow the claim of deduction of payment of interest by the assessee to her two minor children ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to the effect that production of V. D. certificates in the name of two minor children was sufficient proof of genuineness of the loans and consequential allowability of the interest ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not setting aside...
Mathura Prasad Jamuna Prasad Vs. Ghasiram @ Raju and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ187
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a money decree was passed in favour of one Pooran Chand. He has since died. Execution is now sought by his legal heirs.2. The argument raised is that the money decree would also fall within the definition of 'debt' and accordingly Section 214(1)(b) of the Succession Act, 1925 would be attracted. Reliance is being placed on 1981(2) MPWN 57, Kewalram v. Surjeet Singh. This Court preferred to follow the view expressed by Nagpur High Court in Tejraj Rajmal v. Rampyari, 1938 NLJ 99 = AIR 1938 Nag. 528. This Court observed as under :'The view, therefore is that the continuance of an execution application filed by the decree-holder himself, by his legal representatives after the death of the decree-holder is Hot hit by Section 214(1)(b). The other view, which is contrary to the view expressed in Mohammed Yusuf's case (supra) and shared by the Patna, Andhra Pradesh and Madras High Courts, as stated above, is that the ba...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Harjinder Kaur.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1996
Reported in: (1997)141CTR(MP)156
BY THE COURT :This is an IT Ref. under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 at the instance of the Revenue and following three questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this Court :'(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law to hold that there was no good reason or new fact to interfere with the order of AAC who directed to allow the claim of deduction of payment of interest by the assessee to her two minor children (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of AAC to the effect that production of V.D. certificates in the name of two minor children was sufficient proof of genuineness of the loans and consequential allowability of the interest (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not setting aside the order of the AAC, which was passed by admitting fresh evidence without giving opportunity ...
Sunder Lal Vs. Haider Ali and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1996
Reported in: 1998ACJ35
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This order shall dispose of M.A. Nos. 38 and 133 of 1992, Nos. 471 and 472 of 1991 as all the four appeals arise out of judgment and award dated 27.9.1991 of IVth Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, passed in Claim Case Nos. 2 and 3 of 1987, whereby the claimant Haider Ali has been awarded a total compensation of Rs. 24,500/- for sustaining injuries in a motor accident on 13.7.1986 and Hussaini has been awarded a compensation of Rs. 10,500/- for sustaining injuries in the same accident.2. The brief history of the case is that Haider Ali and Hussaini were travelling on a scooter. Haider Ali was driving it while Hussaini was a pillion rider. They met with an accident. Motor vehicle No. MBI 9212 was coming from opposite direction. The same was being driven rashly and negligently. It dashed against the scooter, and resulted in injuries to Haider Ali and Hussaini. Both of them filed separate claim petitions (Haider Ali filed Claim Case No. 2 of 1987 and Hussaini filed...
Ravi Thakur Vs. Shivshankar Patel and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-1996
Reported in: AIR1997MP136; 1997(2)MPLJ649
ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. In all these writ applications, common questions of law and fact arise for consideration and as such they are being disposed of by a common order.2. The writ application pertains to the validity of election of President of the Janpad Panchayat, Mandla. One Ravi Thakur (hereinafter referred to as the returned candidate) was declared elected as a president of Janpad Panchayat, Mandla and his election as such was challenged by one Shiv Shankar Patel (hereinafter referred to as the election petitioner) by filing an election petition under Section 122 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 before the Collector.Writ Petition No. 3802/94: This writ application has been preferred by the returned candidate challenging the order dated 27-9-1994 passed by the Collector, whereby his prayer for dismissal of the election petition on the ground that the election petitioner did not deposit the security cost at the time of presentation of the election petition, has been negatived an...
Shanti Bai Wd/O Prem Chand Surana and ors. Vs. Sajjanmal Mukunmal and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1996
Reported in: 1998(2)MPLJ290
R.S. Garg, J.1. The plaintiffs/landlords who could secure a decree in the Court of the Second Civil Judge, Class I, Durg, in Civil Suit No. 18-A of 1977 were non-suited by the First Additional District Judge, Durg in First Appeal No. 4-A of 1986, have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28-07-1986. The litigation though has a chequered history, but the question on which the appeal has been admitted is very short. The appeal has been admitted for hearing parties on 05.08.1987 on the following substantial question of law:-'Whether the lower appellate Court was justified in reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Court on the ground that the application dated 131.1996 purporting to be Under Section 13(1) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act was not decided ?'2. The landlords filed a suit for eviction against the respondents/tenants, inter alia, pleading that Sajjanmal was inducted as tenant somewhere in the year 1958, had created sub-tenancy and parted wit...
Phool Chand Vs. Kamlesh Mishra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1996
Reported in: II(1998)ACC443; 1998ACJ218
Usha Shukla, J.1. Appellant Phool Chand had put up a claim for compensation amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of injuries sustained by him in an automobile accident which had occurred on the night of 6.4.1989 near Hanuman Mandir, Sehore. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal had passed an award of. 10,000/- only. This amount was recoverable from the respondent Kamlesh Mishra alone, who was driving the offending scooter at the time of the accident. Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4, being the purchaser, the insurer and the original owner of the vehicle, were exonerated, This appeal has been filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation. He has also urged that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 being the owner and insurer of the vehicle should also be made liable for compensation. Relief has been claimed against all the respondents.2. The manner and circumstances in which the accident occurred are not under challenge in this appeal. That the claimant sustained injuries on his person is also pro...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sushila Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1996
Reported in: II(1998)ACC362; 1998ACJ132
Usha Shukla, J.1. A head-on collision took place between truck No. CPB 2031 and bus No. CPF 8729 in the afternoon of 21.6.1986 near the Dehar Bridge on Maharajpur-Sagar road. One Puranlal, a constable posted at P.S. Maharajpur, died in this accident. He was travelling in the aforesaid truck which was owned by respondent Ganesh Prasad, and was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 2. The bus belonged to the M.P.S.R.T.C, and respondent Ayub was driving it at the relevant time. The widow and minor sons and daughters of the deceased claimed Rs. 2,02,000/- as compensation before the Claims Tribunal.2. By an award dated 1.7.1994 in Claim Case No. 58 of 1991, III Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sagar found that the accident was as a result of the negligent driving of both the vehicles. It awarded Rs. 1,08,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum. After deducting the amount of Rs. 15,000/-, the balance Rs. 93,000/- was apportio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »