Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Ram Niwas Vs. Pooran and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: AIR2002MP31; 2001(3)MPHT347
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondents.2. Perused the record.3. The election petition challenging the election of Pooran who had been declared as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Sirsod was allowed by the Sub Divisional Officer/Vihit Adhikari, Panchayat, with the direction requiring recount of the polled votes. The aforesaid order was challenged by Pooran by means of a writ petition, which has given rise to the present Letters Patent Appeal.4. The learned Single Judge of this Court vide the impugned order allowing the writ petition, quashed the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. Besides quashing of the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, the learned Single Judge also issued certain directions covering the matter relating to the appointment of the officers authorised to deal with the election petitions and entrusted with the duties cast in this regard upon the Sub-Divisional Officer, Re...
Prakashchandra Chaudhary and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4608; 2001(4)MPHT337; 2001(3)MPLJ259
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. A short but imporlant question of law arises for determination in this petition is as to whether the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 'the Act') can be permitted to be compounded.2. The case giving rise to this petition is pending in Appeal (No. 68/2000) before the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Mhow, who vide Order dated 23-9-2000 has declined joint prayer made by the complainant-payee and the accused drawee (the petitioners herein) to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act for which matter is convicted by the Trial Magistrate. The learned ASJ has held that the offence under Section 138 is not compoun-dable and no permission to compound the same can be accorded in view of the bar contained under Sub-section (9) of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code').3. Interestingly both the complainant petitioner No. 1 and accused -petitioner No. 2 have come up before this Court under Section 482...
Baldeo Krishna Bahl Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT191; 2002(1)MPLJ461
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This writ petition is directed against order of State Administrative Tribunal dated 16-5-2001 passed in O.A. No. 942 of 1998.2. Petitioner has been retired compulsorily from the post of AssistantAgriculture Engineer on completion of 25 years qualifying service, on the recommendation of the Screening Committee under Rule 42 of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 by order dated 10-12-1998. His allegation is that order is arbitrary and unfair. He was promoted to Class II gazetted post in 1988 on the basis of work and conduct. He did not earn any adverse annual confidential report since 1988. Uncommunicated adverse confidential report can not be taken into consideration for compulsory retirement and rules of natural justice have not been followed by affording opportunity of hearing before passing the orders which is a necessary requirement before passing administrative orders with civil consequences. The Screening Committee did not act according to the...
Union of India Vs. Chhabhaiya and Co. and ors.,
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR201(MP)
N.K. Jain, J.1. The judgments impugned in these appeals filed under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, are rendered by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence), Indore, in Criminal Cases Nos. 36 of 1988, 39 of 1988 and 95 of 1990, acquitting accused-respondents of the charges under Sections 276DD and 278DD read with Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act').2. Although the trial court below has recorded an acquittal on the merits with a finding that the charges against the accused persons are not established, these appeals in my judgment must fall on a law point as to the tenability of the prosecution against the respondents.3. The prosecutions in question were launched in the years 1988 and 1990. The punishing Section 276DD was omitted by the amendment Act of 1987 with effect from April 1, 1989. It will be thus seen that the prosecution in Criminal Case No. 1053 of 1992 was launched after the said deletion while the other two...
Union of India Vs. Chhabhaiya and Co. and ors. Narayan Timbers and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: [2001]253ITR201(MP)
N. K. Jain, J. The judgments impugned in these appeals filed under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, are rendered by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence), Indore, in Criminal Cases Nos. 36 of 1988, 39 of 1988 and 95 of 1990, acquitting accused-respondents of the charges under sections 276DD and 278DD read with section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').Although the Trial Court below has recorded an acquittal on the merits with a finding that the charges against the accused persons are not established, these appeals in my judgment must fall on a law point as to the tenability of the prosecution against the respondents.The prosecutions in question were launched in the years 1988 and 1990. The punishing section 276DD was omitted by the amendment Act of 1987 with effect from 1-4-1989. It will be thus seen that the prosecution in Criminal Case No. 1053 of 1992 was launched after the said deletion while the other...
Union of India Vs. Narayan Timbers
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: [2002]121TAXMAN406(MP)
The judgments impugned in these appeals filed under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 are rendered by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence), Indore, in Criminal Case Nos. 36 of 1988, 39 of 1988 and 95 of 1990, acquitting accused respondents of the charges under sections 276DD and 278DD read with section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. Although the trial court below has recorded acquittal on merits with a finding that the charges against the accused persons are not established, these appeals in my judgment must fail on a law point as to the tenability of the prosecution against the respondents.3. The prosecutions in question were launched in the years 1988 and 1990. The punishing section 276DD was omitted by the Amendment Act of 1981 with effect from 1-4-1989. It will be thus seen that the prosecution in Criminal Case No. 1053 of 1992 was launched after the said deletion while the other two cases were pending ...
Smt. Mohini Devi Heerwani Vs. Shri Kundanlal Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2001
Reported in: AIR2003MP5; 2002(1)MPHT449; 2002(1)MPLJ106
S.C. Pandey, J. 1. This revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order, dated 4-4-2001, passed by the Court of IIIrd Civil Judge, Class-I, Bhopal, in Execution Case No. 22-A/85, whereby the application dated 11-12-2000 purporting to be under Order 21 Rule 2 and Order 21 Rule 97 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed by the Court below. The learned Trial Judge has relied on a decision of Full Bench of this Court reported in the case of Rajeev vs. Arm (AIR 1987 MP 262). In that case it was held that the Executing Court had no jurisdiction to consider the application filed by the applicant for the reason the adjustment was not recorded in terms Order 21 Rule 2 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. Learned counsel for the applicant in this revision has argued that the matter is covered by Order 21 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and therefore his application should have been allowed. It was argued that the Court bel...
Veena Ambedkar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT210; 2002(3)MPLJ333
Arun Mishra, J. 1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed on being unsuccessful in her attempt to assail the conditions fixing the cut-off dates in the advertisement (Annexure P-1) in Clause 3 (b) (born between 2 Sept., 70 to 1 Sept., 75) for AEC, ASC (Food Scientist), EME (MSc and MCA), INT (For Post Graduate Qualification), the writ petition has been dismissed vide the order dated 28-2-2001 [2001(2) M.P.H.T. 336].2. An advertisement (Annexure P-1) was issued inviting applications from unmarried female or issueless widow/divorcee candidates for grant of Commission in the Indian Army. The petitioner had submitted an application on 14th January, 1997 for undergoing Women Special Entry Scheme (Officers) Eleventh WSES(O) Course (Sept., 97). The petitioner claims herselfto be a daughter of an Ex-Army Officer and belongs to the Scheduled Caste. Her application was rejected on the ground of her being over-aged. The petitioner alleged that fixing the age as 21 to 27 years (born betw...
Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhavan Ltd. Vs. Asstt. C.C.E.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2001
Reported in: 2004(164)ELT153(MP)
Deepak Mishra, J.1. By this petition preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has called in question the order dated 13-5-1991 contained in Annexure P/6 passed by the Asstt. Collector, Central Excise, Bhopal, whereby he has held as under :-'In other words reasonable opportunity have already been granted and principles of natural justice have already been duly discharged and there are no fresh arguments with the party as admitted by them in their reply dt. 15-4-1990. Hon'ble Justice Vardarajan of Bombay High Court while hearing Writ Petition No. 1497 of 1977 in case of K. Balan's v. UOI, observed that the right of cross-examination is not necessarily a part of reasonable opportunity and depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Under the circumstances, I do not find it expedient to accede to the request of the party to grant yet another personal hearing as it would be only ritualistic and in turn delay the proceedings. The necessity t...
Nathu and ors. Vs. New India Insurance Co. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC691
A.M. Sapre, J.1. With the consent of parties the appeal is heard finally.2. Claimants are in appeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 12.1.2001 passed by Additional Member, M.A.C.T. Kukshi, District Dhar in Claim Case No. 61/1999 by which the claim petition of claimants (appellants herein) is partly allowed awarding them a total compensation amounting to Rs. 94,000/- with interest for the death of one Anbai, wife of Ram Singh.On 8.5.1999, at about 12.30 p.m. Anbai who was a pillion rider on a motor cycle driven by her husband Ram Singh met with an accident with one bus bearing No. MP-09/G/B/0023 owned by respondent No. 3 and driven by respondent No. 2. As a result of this accident, Anbai died on the spot whereas Ram Singh sustained injuries. The offending bus at the relevant time was insured with the respondent No. 1, Insurance Company.3. This led to filing of claim petition by the present appellants (claimants) before the Claims Tribunal claiming compensat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »