Madhya Pradesh Court December 1998 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.
Shyamabai Vs. Radhakisan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1998
Reported in: I(2000)DMC618
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J. 1. The appellant is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by 3rd Addl. District Judge, Shajapur in the matter of Matrimonial Case No. 9A/92 dated 7.5.1994 by which he rejected the application of the appellant for setting aside the decree which was passed against her ex parte, granting decree of restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the respondent.2. Mr. Z.A. Khan, Counsel appearing for the appellant pointed out that the learned trial Judge was very much impressed by the discrepancy between the evidence of the appellant Shyamabai and her mother Gangabai in respect of the period for which Shyamabai was admitted in the hospital for ailment of tumor of the abdomen of Shyamabai. If the judgment passed by Trial Court dismissing the application for restoration filed by Shyamabai in which the respondent was ex parte, is examined, it itself shows that the learned Judge has accepted that for some period Shyamabai wa...
Commimoner of Income Tax Vs. Abhyeshwar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(MP)372
ORDERBY THE COURT:Revenue first filed this application under s. 256(1) of IT Act requiring Tribunal to refer following two questions for opinion of High Court:'(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the penalty of Rs. 57,810 levied by the AO under s. 271B and upheld by the learned CIT(A)?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Honble Tribunal was justified in law in allowing by admitting additional evidence without affording opportunity to Revenue, despite the material on record against assessee's claim in the matter?'2. The Tribunal on consideration of the matter rejected the application by order dt. 13th May, 1998, on the ground that stated questions were questions of fact and not law 'and, therefore, did not warrant any reference.3 It transpires that assessee, a co-operative society was charged of delay in obtaining the audit report pertaining to asst. yr. 1986-87. Penalty proceeding...
Bombay Pharma Products Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1998
Reported in: [1999]237ITR614(MP)
B.A. Khan, J.1. The petitioner-firm is engaged in manufacture and sale of medicines. It filed its return for the assessment year 1984-85, declaring its taxable income at Rs. 91,640. Along with the return it filed all necessary documents including balance-sheet, trading account, profit and loss account, depreciation statement, etc. Upon this the respondent-Income-tax Officer completed the assessment proceedings and passed the assessment order dated March 26, 1986, under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. He, however, issued notice dated March 3, 1989, for reopening of assessment for the assessment year 1984-85, on the ground that he had reason to believe that income for this assessment year had escaped assessment.2. The petitioner has challenged this on the ground that it was vague and uncertain and did not disclose any reason for the reopening of the assessment and that it had asked the Income-tax Officer vide letter dated April 17, 1989, to furnish reasons supporting the acti...
B.K. Dubey Vs. Lokayukt and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ711
ORDERA.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a public interest litigation whereby the petitioner has sought for a issue of mandamus directing the Special Police Establishment, M.P., to register a criminal case against the respondent No. 3- Dr. Vijay Kumar, IPS, and to investigate into the offences as mentioned in the writ petition. It is also prayed that the respondent No. 3 be removed from Police Establishment, M.P. It is also prayed that the respondent No. 4/State be directed to get investigations conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation/Income Tax Department into the assets and properties of the Police Officers posted in the Special Police Establishment.2. It is most unfortunate that the petitioner, who himself was Chief Secretary of this State, has resorted to this public interest litigation levelling allegations against the respondent No. 3, who is working as a Superintendent of Police (Special Police Establishment) Lokayukt Karayalaya, Bhopal. The Lokayukt Organisation is headed by t...
Bhagwani Sahu Vs. Vijay Kumar Mohanty and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ1240
Dipak Misra, J. 1. The moot question that arises for consideration in this appeal preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is whether grant of compensation in a sum of Rs. 75,000 to the agonised parents who have sustained the loss of their daughter whose life spark was extinguished being dashed against by the Tempo owned by the appellant herein is justified or not. Mr. H.B. Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant would like us to interfere with the award on a solitary ground that the deceased was a seventeen years old girl and would not have contributed to the parents for long, and hence the quantum determined by the Tribunal is not only excessive and illegal but also unpragmatic.2. Before we deal with the contention of Mr. Agrawal which reflects the gender discrimination without any other factual foundation, it is essential to narrate some essential facts that unfold the tragic end of the victim Mahamaya.3. The facts: In the...
Bombay Pharma Products Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(MP)350
B.A. Khan J.Petitioner firm is engaged in manufacture and sale of medicines. It filed its return for the asst. yr. 1984-85 declaring its taxable income at Rs. 91,640. Along with the return it filed all necessary documents including balance sheet, trading Ale,, P&L; ale, depreciation statement etc. Upon this respondent ITO completed assessment proceedings and passed assessment order dt. 26th March, 1986, under s. 143(1) of IT Act. He, however, issued notice dt. 3rd March, 1989, for reopening of assessment for asst. yr. 1984-85, on the ground that he had reason to believe that income for this assessment year had escaped assessment.2. Petitioner has challenged this on the ground that it was vague and uncertain and did not disclose any reason for the reopening of the assessment and that it had asked ITO vide letter dt. 17th April, 1989, to furnish reasons supporting the action but in vain. It is submitted that petitioner had discharged his duty to disclose fully and truly all material and ...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kamla Shankar S/O Ramnihor Prajapati
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ706
D.P.S. Chauhan, J.1. It is a State appeal under Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of sentence filed against the judgment and order dated 11-7-1988, passed in S.T. No. 9/88 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon wherein the accused was acquitted of the charge as levelled against him under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and instead he was convicted under Section 304 Part-II, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 3000/- only and in default of payment of fine, the accused was required to undergo simple imprisonment of one year.2. The incident in question relating to the conviction of accused Kamla Shanker is dated 11th October, 1987 occurred in village Mohra. Accused Kamla Shankar was running a Bhatti (distillery) and on 11-10-1987 while Kanhaiya, the deceased was going on cycle from village Motipur to Mohara accused Kamla Shankar stopped him at his distillery and after stopping him offered liquor to him which he consumed along with other eatab...
Asha Dwivedi Vs. Sub-divisional Officer and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ76
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayal Odgadi, Block Deosar, District Sidhi. She was served with a show cause notice on allegations of certain financial irregularities, for her removal under Section 40 of the M. P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam (for short 'the Act'). Under Section 39( l)(b) the prescribed authority has power to place an office bearer of Panchayat under suspension if he has been served with a notice along with a charge sheet to show cause for removal under Section 40 of the Act. The relevant Section 39(I)(b) and (2) as is stood then reads as under:-'39. Suspension of office hearer of Panchayat.- (1) The prescribed authority may suspend from office any office bearer -(a).......(b) who has been served with a notice along with a charge sheet to show cause under this Act, for his removal from the office.(2) The order of suspension under sub-section (I) shall be reported to the State Government within a period often days and shall be...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kamla Shankar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ2709
D.P.S. Chauhan, J.1. It is a State appeal under Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of sentence filed against the judgment and order dated 11 -7-1988, passed in S.T.No. 9/98 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon wherein the accused was acquitted of the charge as levelled against him under Section 302, IPC and instead he has convicted under Section 304, Part-II, I.P.C. and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 3000/- only and in default of payment of fine, the accused was required to undergo simple imprisonment of one year.2. The incident in question relating to the conviction of accused Kamla Shanker is dated 11th October, 1987 occurred in village Mohra. Accused Kamla Shanker was running a Bhatti (distillery) and on 11-10-87 while Kanhaiya, the deceased was going on cycle from village Motipur to Mohara accused Kamla Shanker stopped him at his distillery and after stopping him offered liquor to him which he consumed along with other eatables. During this period th...
Ranu Wd/O Sudhir Ghosh Vs. Rai Bahadur Bhootnath Dey and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ388
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.Shri Alok Aradhe, learned counsel for the applicant.Shri H.B. Agrawal, Learned counsel for the non-applicant No. 1.1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is finally heard.2. In a suit filed under Section 20 of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act seeking eviction of the tenant, as the tenant was not depositing monthly rent and did not deposit the arrears of rent, the plaintiff moved an application under Section 13(6) requesting the Court that defence of the defendant against eviction be struck out. The defendant contested the application and inter alia pleaded that as the suit is not under any of the clauses of Section 12(1) of M.P. Accommodation Control Act neither the provisions of Section 13 are applicable nor the tenants are required to deposit the rent. After hearing the parties, the trial Court observed that the suit would be deemed to be a suit under Section 12(1)(a) of M.P. Accommodation Control Act and as such provisions of Section 13 of the Act would b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »