Madhya Pradesh Court April 2001 Judgments
Munnibi and Others Vs. Rameshchandra and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT149
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 61/99, dated 8-10-1999.2. Claimants are wife, father and three children of the deceased Ibrahim, who died in the motor accident which took place on 31-5-1996 at 6.30 p.m.between Kalarai and Maachal villages (Indore) when the truck by which he was travelling was hit by offending truck No. MPU 6624. Allegation is that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending truck otherwise it would not have taken place. The defence of the Insurance Company is that the deceased was an unauthorised passenger in the vehicle and he was not a driver. This defence has been rejected by the Claims Tribunal. It is also found that accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver. Consequently, compensation of Rs. 1,25,200/- has been awarded with interest at the rate of 12 percent from the date of application. This a...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Imlibai and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC248; 2001(3)MPHT10
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 18-9-1998 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sendwa (West Nimar) in Claim Case No. 21/1996.2. The accident took place on 27-12-1995, when the deceased Magan was going to Haat for selling his articles and was hit by the offending vehicle registration No. M.P.M. 3483 resulting into his death. Consequently, his dependents filed a claim petition for compensation for the death of the deceased. The objection of the Insurance Company that the deceased wascarrying luggage and not goods, is not at all sustainable. The deceased was going to Haat for selling his goods. They were goods, meant for sale at Haat. Consequently, the case is squarely covered by the decision of Apex Court in 2000(2) MPHT 340 = AIR 2000 SC 235 (New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Satpal Singh and others).3. Consequently, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed.4. Misc. Appeal dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Anand Kumar Goenka Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT252; 2001(3)MPLJ272
ORDERS.C. Pandey, J. 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 9-5-97 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Maihar in Criminal Case No. 12/97.2. It appears that the Forest Range Officer, Maihar investigated the offences punishable under Sections 33 and 63 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (for short 'the Forest Act') and the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, (for short 'the Act of 1984').3. The charge-sheet against the petitioner and the other accused persons was filed in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Maihar. The petitioner and the other accused persons were charged for violation of Sections 33 and 63 of the Forest Act and also for violation of Rules 3 and 29 of M.P. Transit Rules framed under the Forest Act of 1927, Further the charge-sheet alleged that the petitioner has also violated the Forest (Conservation) Act. These are the forest offences which were indicated in the charge-she...
Tag this Judgment!Binodiram Balchand and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2001
Reported in: [2001]251ITR819(MP)
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. We are requested to record our opinion on a question which has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, which can be mentioned hereunder : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to deduction of bad debt of Rs. 1,27,856 ?' 2. The need for referring this question to us for answer by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, arose because such question arose out of I. T. A. No. 759/Ind of 1985. 3. The assessee happened to be a registered firm carrying on the business under the style 'Binodiram Balchand and Co., Indore'. It carried on the business of money-lending. It was having another sister concern under the style 'Vinod Steel Limited'. The partners of the assessee-firm were the directors and shareholders in the said company. The assessee had advancedcertain loans and had debited interest to their accounts. These amounts of interest has been shown as inc...
Tag this Judgment!Rajani Extractions Limited and anr. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2001
Reported in: [2001]123STC469(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The challenge in this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is essentially to the order (annexure P12). In substance, by this order and the orders passed earlier to one the sales tax authorities have refused to grant separate registration to the petitioner for their one unit under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (since repealed). The question is, whether the action of the sales tax authorities in refusing to grant registration is sustainable or not In order to appreciate the issue involved, it is necessary to state the factual background of the case that eventually brought the issue in writ to this Court.2. Petitioner is a limited company formed by the members of one Rajani family. Earlier these very members were carrying on business of solvent extraction by and under the name 'Rajani Extractions'. The partners of the firm then formed company (i.e., petitioner) and made this company as one of the pa...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhaiyalal and Others Vs. Gammu and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ820; 2001(3)MPHT147; 2001(3)MPLJ361
ORDERBhawani Singh, J.1. This appeal arises out of the award by the M.A.C. Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 95/91, dated 31-1-1996.2. The claimants arc father, mother, brothers and sister of the deceased Deepak Kumar, who died in the motor accident on 9-12-2000 atM.G. Road, Indore, when the WaterTanker MEN 3900 owned by the Municipal Corporation, Indore, driven by Gammu hit him. At the time of the accident the deceased was 26 years old, carrying on cloth merchant shop under the name and style M/s Rajdeep Cloth Stores, Indore, earning Rs. 6,000/- per month. His younger brother Lokesh was also injured in this accident and the Claims Tribunal has awarded him compensation assessing his income at Rs. 1,500/- per month. In this case, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a lump-sum compensation of Rs. 50,000/-. The claimants are not satisfied with this award, therefore, it has been challenged through this appeal.3. Kanhaiyalal is father of the deceased. He states that the deceased had his own sh...
Tag this Judgment!Ajab Rao Chadokar and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-2001
Reported in: AIR2001MP296; 2001(4)MPHT461; 2001(3)MPLJ251
Dipak Misra, J. 1. Similar questions of law being involved in these two writ petitions they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order. The facts in each case shall be separately set out for the sake of clarity.2. In W.P. No. 183/2001 the facts as have been unfolded are that in the month of January, 2000 an election for the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Gunkhed was to be held. The respondent No. 2, Smt. Gangabai, submitted her nomination form to contest the election of Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat. The said seat of the Sarpanch was reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidate. The respondent No. 2 belongs to Other Backward Class and, therefore, objection was raised by the petitioners before the Returning Officer seeking rejection of her nomination papers. The respondent No. 2 was given an opportunity of hearing by the Returning Officer. It has been putforth that the respondent No. 2 submitted certain documents in support of her submission that she belongs to...
Tag this Judgment!Jamila Bi and ors. Vs. Gurmit Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ1035
Bhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 13.5.1997, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, in Claim Case No. 42 of 1997.2. Nisar Khan alias Saleem (deceased) was working as motor mechanic at Indore Transport Nagar. On 9.7.1996, he was attending truck No. UP 02-A 2675. With a short gap, loaded truck No. MP 09-K 6311 was on jack, which slipped and the loaded truck fell down in such a way that it struck other truck No. UP 02-A 2675. He was hit and he died. The claimants are wife, daughter and mother of the deceased. It is alleged that the accident was result of rash and negligent act of the driver of truck No. MP 09-K 6311.3. The owner and driver of truck No. MP 09-K 6311 have not contested the claim, therefore, proceeded ex parte.4. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. has contested the claim and denied the allegations. Its grievance is that the accident was not reported to it and the truck No. UP 02-A 2675 has not been made party to the case, the...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhaiyalal and 4 ors. Vs. Gammu and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-2001
Reported in: 1(2002)ACC706
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of the award by the M.A.C. Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 95/1991 dated 31.1.1996.2. The claimants are father, mother, brother and sister of the deceased Deepak Kumar, who died in the motor accident on 9.12.1990 at M.G. Road, Indore, when the Water Tanker MBN-3900 owned by the Municipal Corporation, Indore, driven by Gammu hit him. At the time of the accident the deceased was 26 years old, carrying on cloth merchant shop under the name and style M/s. Rajdeep Cloth Stores, Indore, earning Rs. 6,000/- per month. His younger brother Lokesh was also injured in this accident and the Claims Tribunal has awarded him compensation assessing his income at Rs. 1,500/- per month. In this case, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a lump-sum compensation of Rs. 50,000/-. The claimants are not satisfied with this award, therefore, it has been challenged through this appeal.3. Kanhaiyalal is father of the deceased. He states that the deceased had his own sh...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kewalchand Surajmal Bori
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2001
Reported in: [2002]256ITR166(MP); 2002(3)MPHT165; 2002(1)MPLJ97
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. By this application, a prayer has been made to this High Court to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to make a reference in view of the provisions of section of 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for convenience), and, therefore, we are now dealing with the question which can be mentioned as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 95,000 levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act ?' In view of that, now we are dealing with it in view of the submissions advanced by Shri R.L. Jain, counsel appearing for the Commissioner of Income-tax, and Shri H.C. Sarda, counsel appearing for the respondent-asses-see. 2. The facts in brief can be stated as under : The assessee-HUF, Kasturchand Surajmal Bori, Jhabua, filed the return pertaining to the assessment year 1973-74, which happens to be the subject-matter of the pre...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »