Madhya Pradesh Court January 2001 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.
Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Ram Charan Tanya and anr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-18-2001
Reported in: III(2002)ACC305
V.K. Agrawal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 28.2.1997, in Civil Suit No. 2-B/1996, by Third Additional District Judge, Satna, whereby compensation of Rs. 65,000/- was granted in favour of the claimant /respondent No. 1.2. The plaintiff/respondent No. 1 is the son of deceased Jagannath Patel, who died of electrocution from the electric line being installed by the defendants/ appellants. The appellants had given the contract to instal the said electric connection to respondent No. 2.3. The plaintiff/respondent No. 1 alleged that his father deceased Jagannath died of electrocution on account of negligence on the part of appellants as well as respondent No. 2. It was averred that the deceased was aged about fifty years. It was also averred by the plaintiff/respondent No. 1, that the deceased used to earn Rs. 50.00 per day. Plaintiff claimed compensation of Rs. 2 lacs.4. The claim as above was contested on behalf of the appellants. They denied that there...
Amir UddIn Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-2001
Reported in: [2001]248ITR550(MP); 2001(2)MPLJ225
A.M. Sapre, J.1. By filing this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner--an assessee, has questioned the legality and validity of an order dated July 14, 1992 (annexure-C), passed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Indore, under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act'). The facts which lie in a narrow compass and which are relevant for the disposal of this writ petition need mention infra.2. The petitioner, an assessee, is engaged in the business of sale of kerosene and transport. He is also engaged in other kinds of businesses which he is carrying on as partner with some other persons. He also owns certain immovable properties which yield yearly income liable to be taxed under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The petitioner is being assessed to payment of income-tax as an individual.3. The present petition relates to the assessment year 1991-92 for which the accounting year is April 1, 1990, to March 31...
Amir UddIn Vs. Income Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-2001
Reported in: (2001)166CTR(MP)356
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.By filing this writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner--an assessee, has questioned the legality and validity of an order dated 14-7-1992 (Annexure C), passed by Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Indore, under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Facts which lie in a narrow compass and which are relevant for the disposal of this writ petition need mention infra.The petitioner--an assessee, is engaged in the business of sale of kerosene and transport. He is also engaged in other kind of businesses which he is carrying on as partner with some other persons. He also owns certain immovable properties which yields yearly income liable to be taxed under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner is being assessed to payment of income-tax as an individual.2. The present petition relates to assessment year 1991-92 for which the accounting year is 1-4-1990, to 31-3-1991.3. The peti...
Smt. Sushila Dixit Vs. Shri Ram Prakash and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT155; 2001(2)MPLJ622
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court the petitioner has prayed for issue of writ of certiorari for quashment of order dated 27-12-2000 contained in Annexure P-l passed in case No. 20/C-144/99-2000. 2. The facts as have been exposited are that respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 122 of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 for setting aside the election of the petitioner to the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Chhidari. It was set forth in the election petition that though a prayer was made for recounting of votes before the Competent Authority the same was not acceded to and, therefore, there should be recounting. Apart from the aforesaid assertion the election was challenged on other grounds. A written statement was filed by the contesting respondent No. 1 contending inter alia that no application was filed before the Returning Officer for recounting of votes. The other assertions were also disputed. The Specified Officer framed...
Classic Builders and Developers Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2001
Reported in: [2001]251ITR492(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. By filing this writ under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner claims the following reliefs :'7. (a) By an appropriate writ, direction or order respondent No. 4 be directed not to accept the valuation made by respondent No. 3 vide annex-lire P-2 ; (b) By an appropriate writ, direction or order, it be held that the reference made by respondent No. 2 vide annexure P-1 to respondent No. 3 is without jurisdiction, unwarranted and not sustainable in law and, therefore, deserves to be quashed'. 2. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in this writ and the issue urged, a few facts which lie in a narrow compass that led to filing of the petition need mention.3. The petitioner an assessee as defined under Section 2(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as ''the Act') is engaged in the business of construction of multi-storeyed buildings and allied construction. The petitioner has filed the return of its income...
Dayaldas Vs. Latabai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2001
Reported in: II(2001)DMC247
V.K. Agrawal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.9.1996, in Civil Suit No. 28-A/94 by First Additional District Judge, Katni, dismissing the appellant's application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called the 'Act' for short) seeking divorce from the respondent.2. The plaintiff/appellant filed an application under Section 13 of the Act, on the ground that his wife - the respondent suffered from mental ailment from before the marriage, which was suppressed from him. It was also averred that the bahaviour of respondent/wife was erratic and indicated that she was not a mentally normal person. She had gone back to her parents home in the year 1989, i.e. about six years prior to the filing of application and had not returned back. The plaintiff/ appellant, therefore, prayed that the decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Act, be granted.3. The respondent remained absent and did not turn up despite service of notice of petiti...
Anil Kumar Karandikar Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT575; 2002(2)MPLJ217
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. The petitioner claims sympathetic treatment. This is last submission, but, not least. The petitioner was appointed in the Pilot Project for a fixed period upto 30th September, 2000. He was appointed on 15-1-1999. He absented himself without taking leave from 11-10-1999. The petitioner applied for casual leave on 8-10-1999 of one day. On 11 -10-1999 he has filed an application for grant of casual leave upto 21-10-1999. Since the petitioner was working in the Pilot Project, he was required by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to file a proper application for sanction of earned leave along with the medical report. Petitioner applied for commuted leave for the period 11-10-1999 to 21-10-1999. He was informed that he was not entitled for such a leave as such he should apply for earned leave. It appears that the petitioner did not apply for earned leave. Hence, he was asked on 19-11-1999 to present himself on duty and to file explanation and to show reason why disciplinary...
Classic Builders and Developers Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2001
Reported in: [2001]115TAXMAN393(MP)
ORDERBy filing this writ under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner claims following relief :'7(a) By an appropriate writ, direction or order the respondent No. 4 be directed not to accept the valuation made by the respondent No. 3 vide Annexure P2;(b) By an appropriate writ, direction or order, it be held that the reference made by the respondent No. 2 vide Annexure P 1 to the respondent No. 3 is without jurisdiction, unwarranted and not sustainable in law and, therefore, deserves to be quashed.'In order to appreciate the controversy involved in this writ and the issue urged, few facts which lie in a narrow compass that led to filing of the petition need mention.2. The petitioner, an assessee, as defined under section 2(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is engaged in the business of construction of multistoreyed buildings and allied construction. The petitioner has filed the return of their income for the assessment year 1999-2000 ...
Nagar Palika Nigam, Gwalior Vs. Kailash NaraIn Srivastava and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT389
R.B. Dixit, J.1. Respondent-plaintiffs had filed a civil suit No. 14-A/92 in the Court of Third Civil Judge Class I, Gwalior, for declaration and permanent injunction on the ground that their father late Anandi Prasad Shrivastava was owner and occupier of the Survey Nos. 1125, 1126, 1128, 1131 and 1132, situated at Morar.Out of the above survey numbers, in Survey Nos. 1128, 1131 and 1132 their father and defendant No. 3 (Saint Peter's Church) had also equal share while Survey Nos. 1125 and 1126 were in exclusive ownership and possession of his father. Thus, Survey Nos. 1125 and 1126 arc referred as 'disputed land'.2. The father of the plaintiffs died on 28-4-1982 and since then the plaintiffs are in possession as being his legal heirs and cultivating the suit land through one Gyasiram on the spot. On 12-12-1991 employees of Nagar Nigam and State Government tried to evect them which necessitated the filing of the suit.3. Defendant No. 3 is exclusively claiming the right and possession o...
Durga Prasad Verma Vs. Municipal Corporation and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT3
ORDERR.B. Dixit, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by order dated 27-2-98 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 19/92 by 8th Additional Judge to District Judge, Gwalior confirming the order dated 5-3-92 passed in Case No. 48/89 by 8th Civil Judge Class-II, Gwalior wherein an application of plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. was dismissed, the plaintiff-petitioner has filed this revision praying for allowing the interim relief as sought for.2. Plaintiff had filed the suit for restraining respondents-defendants from interfering in his possession on Municipal Quarter No. 21-22 which he continues to occupy even after retirement.3. The respondents contested the suit on the ground that since the premises were occupied in lieu of plaintiff being employee of the Municipal Corporation, he has lost further right to occupy the same after his retirement in view of the provisions envisaged under Section 63 of the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956.4. The learned Trial Court rejected an application for temp...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »