Madhya Pradesh Court November 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.
Phoolchand and ors. Vs. Jaikumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT210; 2002(2)MPLJ189
ORDERN.S. Azad, J. 1. It is not being disputed that on a report filed by Police Station, Moti Nagar, Sagar, a criminal case bearing No. 18/2000 was registered in the Court of City Magistrate, Sagar, under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which property situated in Mangalgiri locality, was in dispute betweenboth these parties. A perusal of photocopy of certified copy of the order dated 18th June, 2001 passed by City Magistrate, Sagar reveals that on the basis of aforesaid report, the preliminary order was passed on 24th October, 2000. On 28th November, 2000 party No. 1 (respondents) putforth their claim in writing. Then on 12th December, 2000 written reply was filed on behalf of petitioner Nos. 5 to 14. Thereafter, a written reply is stated to have been filed on behalf of petitioner Nos. 1, 4 and 15 also without referring the date. 2. On consideration of the various litigations which were till then fought by these parties and their respective claims, the City Magistrate...
Bedilal Rajak and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT338; 2002(2)MPLJ496
ORDERN.S.Azad, J. 1.Arguments heard.2. The order dated 26th October, 1999 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sehora, Dist. Jabalpur has turned down the petitioners request for supply of copies of statement recorded under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, placing reliance on Ashok Dubey v. State of M.P., reported in 1980 JLJ at page 250.3. On consideration of this referred case, it is noted that the Division Bench of this Court has expressed no opinion on the point, whether the statements recorded under Section 174 of the Cr.PC are required to be furnished to the accused as of right, because in that case, the statements were already supplied and the question became of academic discussion, as pointed out in Paragraph 48 at page 267.4. It is found clearly explained by this Court in Chads Victor v. Stateof M.P., reported in M.P. Weekly Notes 2000(1) Note No. 180 at page 282 that the statements recorded under Section 174, Cr.PC (Marg) should be supplied to the accused as they...
P.R. Enterprises Vs. M.P.E.B. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT109; 2002(1)MPLJ495
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. Challenge in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India by the petitioner is to an order/communication dated 4-9-2000 (Annexure P-12) said to have been passed by one Committee known as Dues Settlement Committee constituted by the M.P.E.B. By this impugned order, the Superintending Engineer, City Circle, Indore has informed to the petitioner that Dues Settlement Committee has rejected the case of petitioner by observing as under :--'No revision is required.'2. It is this communication which is under challenge by the petitioner in this writ.3. Heard Shri Sunil Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri P.C. Jain, learned counsel for respondents.4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having persued the record of the case, I am constrained to allow the writ and quash the impugned communication/order, what ever it may be named.4. It is not necessary for me to go into the merits or demerits of the controversy which was ...
Madhya Pradesh Cement Manufacturers' Association Vs. State of Madhya P ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2001
Reported in: AIR2002MP62; 2002(1)MPHT84; 2002(2)MPLJ195
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J. This batch of Writ Petitions (W.P. Nos. 3547 of 2001. M.P. Cement, v. State of M.P. and Ors., 3911 of 2001, Anant Spinning Mills Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 3912 of 2001, Moral Overseas Limited v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 3926 of 2001, Ritspin Synthetics Limited v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 3928 of 2001, Pratibha Syntex Limited v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 3929 of 2001, Maikaal Fibres Limited v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 3933 of 2001, Nahar Spinning Limited v. The State of M.P. and Ors, 3940 of 2001, National Steel Industries Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 3941 of 2001, Parasrampuria International Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 3970 of 2001, Century Textiles and Industrial Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and Anr., 4020 of 2001, Hind Syntex Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 4292 of 2001, J.K. Industries Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 4549 of 2001, Grasim Industries Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and Ors., 4563 of 2001, Flex Chemicals ltd. ...
Shaw Wallace and Company Limited and ors. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and or ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2001
Reported in: [2002]127STC61(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J. 1. Challenge in this writ is to one seizure memo (annexure H) and the penalty order dated October 9, 1989 (annexure J), passed by Sales Tax Officer (Investigation) Check Post, Sendhwa. Facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.2. On September 19, 1989, the Sales Tax Sleuths intercepted one truck bearing No. MKO 9186 at Sendhwa check-post, which was carrying Indian-made foreign liquor (IMFL)--400 bottles from Maharashtra to Madhya Pradesh. The person in-charge of offending truck carrying the liquor was asked to produce the necessary documents so as to satisfy the authorities that the goods in transit are duly tax-paid. The person concerned, one Mr. Sharma failed to produce the satisfactory proof and the documents produced had several defects. Accordingly the sales tax authorities seized the truck and initiated the proceedings. The person concerned was given adequate opportunity in the proceedings to tender required documents to show that the goods in transit were being ca...
Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2001
Reported in: [2002]128STC604(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. Heard finally, with consent.2. By filing this writ under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus against the respondents commanding them to issue/release the amended eligibility certificate to the petitioner to enable the petitioner to avail of the facility of deferment of payment of tax for the additional period of two years from December 1, 1997 to November 30, 1999.3. Indeed, in view of short controversy or I would say so-called controversy, it is really not necessary to narrate the facts much less in detail. It is not disputed by the State--the respondents that on June 16, 1998 (anncxure F), the decision has been taken by the Stale Level Committee to grant/issue the necessary amended eligibility certificate in favour of the petitioner to enable the petitioner to claim the benefit of sales tax up to November 30, 1999. Indeed, it was also informed to the petitioner with a request to execute the supplementary agr...
Panam Packers (P) Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2001
Reported in: [2002]128STC517(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. By this petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the order dated July 17, 1995 (annexure P/5) and order dated July 17, 1995 (annexure P/5-A) passed by the revisionary authority under Section 39(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (for short, 'the Act') (since repealed) arising out of an assessing order dated February 10, 1994 and August 26, 1993 for the period (April 1, 1989 to March 31, 1990) and (April 1, 1990 to March 31, 1991) respectively.2. The short question that falls for consideration in this writ is whether the petitioner is entitled to claim set-off under Section 8 of the Act for the period in question in respect of the goods in question. Both the assessing authority and the revisionary authority have declined to grant set-off and have thus rejected the petitioner's claim. The petitioner is now in writ to challenge these orders by which their claim for set-off was rejected.3. The petitioner i...
Vijaysingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-20-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT136
S.L. Kochar, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against judgment dated 19-12-89 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Khargone, in S.T. No. 187 of 1989 convicting appellant Vijay Singh for the offence under Section 376, IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default RI for six months, under Section 452, IPC, RI for one year and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default RI for one month under Section 342, IPC, RI for six months and under Section 506B, IPC, RI for six months. Appellant Kadva was also convicted and sentenced but because of his death, his appeal has abated as per Court's order dated 12-8-98. The Trial Court has also ordered all the substantive sentences to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is that prosecutrix Lata (P.W. 3) was all alone in her house on 8-3-89. Her mother had gone to Rajasthan before one month from the date of occurrence, her elder sister Bharti had also gone to house of her friend. On 8-3-89...
Kamal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-20-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT169
S.L. Kochar, J.1. Appellant Kamal has filed this appeal against the judgment and findings dated 20th February, 1992 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas (Smt. Sharmishtha Dave) thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 323 of IPC in Session Trial No. 5/99 and sentencing him 7 years RI and 6 months RI in default, fine of Rs. 500/-respectively.2. The prosecution case in nutshell is that on 5-12-89 when prosecutrix Pavitrabai (P.W. 1) had gone to the field for grazing cattle alongwith her cousin sister Rajshri (P.W. 2), appellant Kamal was grazing cattle at nearby place. It is alleged by the prosecution that Rajshri was assaulted by lathi and therefore she ran away from the place. Thereafter, appellant Kamal caught hold of the prosecutrix and did forcible intercourse with her as well as unnatural act simultaneously. When the prosecutrix was raped by the appellant, at the same time, Pritam uncle of the prosecutrix came there, on seeing him,...
Mahesh Kumar Kanskar Vs. Mandla Balaghat Kshetriya GramIn Bank, Mandla ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-20-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT200; 2002(2)MPLJ528
ORDERArun Mishra, J. 1. The question for consideration is whether the disciplinary authority who himself was examined as a witness in the case in support of the allegation could have passed the impugned order of punishment dated 21-5-97 (Annexure V). The punishment of withholding one increment with cumulative effect wasinflicted. Another question is whether there was due application of mind by the disciplinary authority while passing the impugned order.2. Petitioner Mahesh Kumar Kanskar was working as Clerk-cum-Cashier with Mandla Balaghat Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Mandla. He was charge-sheeted on October 1st, 1986. Allegation was that the petitioner was sent to State Bank of India for collecting cash of Rs. 5,000/-, did not reach up to 3 p.m. the concerned bank. This act was negligent and irresponsible which caused interruption in the working of the Bank. Enquiry was conducted; during the course of enquiry, Chairman Jaiprakash Mishra himself was examined as witness on behalf of managemen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »