Madhya Pradesh Court September 2001 Judgments
Ramlal Tripathi Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT443; 2002(2)MPLJ519
Dipak Misra, J. 1. Invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for to call for the entire records and upon perusal of the same to quash the order dated 12-1-2001 contained in Annexure P-1 by which the tender submitted by the respondent No. 4 was accepted and further to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to allot the same in favour of the petitioner.2. The facts as have been undraped in the writ petition are that the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department (Land Acquisition and Re-habilitation Department), the respondent No. 3 herein, invited tender forthe purpose of lying down the water supply in Modal Town near Mirgouti Satna. The date of closing of the tender was 9-11-2000 and the opening date was 16-11-2000. On the dale fixed, the tenders were opened and it was found that the tender of the petitioner was the second lowest and that of the respondent No. 4 wa...
Tag this Judgment!Steel Tubes of India Limited Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2001
Reported in: [2002]128STC587(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case I am of the considered view that the issue involved in this writ is covered in favour of petitioner by the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Birla Jute and Industries Ltd. v. State of M.P. reported in [2000] 119 STC 14 and also another decision of this Court main seat in the case of K.P. Enterprises v. Divisional Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Raipur [1996] 102 STC 483 (MP) affirmed by the Supreme Court as the SLP filed by State was dismissed and then affirmed by the Supreme Court in Birla Jute case [2000] 119 STC 14.2. In substance the ratio of aforesaid two decisions is that once the eligibility certificate is issued for availability of exemption from payment of tax for a particular period, then long after expiry of the sale exemption period, the State authorities cannot, retrospectively cancel the eligibility certificate.3. The facts that led to fi...
Tag this Judgment!Daljeetsingh and ors. Vs. Hardeepsingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ727; 2002(1)MPLJ110
S.P. Srivastava, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants.2. Perused the record.3. This appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed against the award of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal praying for the enhancement of the amount of compensation determined at a figure of Rs. 1,71,500 carrying 12 per cent per annum interest. The appellants have prayed for the modification of the award seeking enhancement of the compensation amount to the figure of Rs. 4,56,000 with the enhanced rate of interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum.4. The facts in brief, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this appeal lie in a narrow compass: In an accident on 9.9.1998, involving the offending motor vehicle, a jeep bearing registration No. MP 06-B 6446, Shyama Bhadoria, the wife of appellant No. 1 and the mother of appellant No. 2, aged 3 years and appellant No. 3, aged 5 years, had met her untimely death. The deceased at the time of her ...
Tag this Judgment!Dhananjan Bisen Vs. Devi Bai and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2001
Reported in: AIR2002MP79; 2001(4)MPHT298; 2002(1)MPLJ149
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is defendant's second appeal under Section 100, CPC. Arguments on the question of admission heard.2. The dispute is in respect of eight feet wide passagge on the westernside of the houses belonging to the plaintiffs as shown in the map annexed tothe plaintiff the plaint and also in the map Ex. P-8. It is admitted that Ramchand was originally the owner of the land and he sold plots to different persons. Ex.P-3 is certified copy of registered sale-deed dated 22-2-1956 executed by Ram-chand in favour of Motilal. In this sale-deed it is mentioned.^^vkB QqV dk jkLrk if'pe dh vksj ls esu jksMdks tkus dk jgsxk tehu jkepUn dh gS flQZ vkus tkus dk fjLrkjh gd vkidk jgsxkA**3. The Trial Court after considering the documentary and oral evidence of both the sides held in Para 9 of its judgment that Ramchand had granted right of way to Motilal on eight feet wide land but this was a licence given to Motilal and it stood revoked when Ramchand sold that land to the father of...
Tag this Judgment!Jagannath Prasad Soni and ors. Vs. Laxmi NaraIn Soni and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT247
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is a revision by the plaintiffs against the order by which the application of the intervenor 'Shri Dev Radha Krishna Jugal Kishore Mandir', a registered Public Trust, under Order 1 Rule 10 (2), CPC for impleading it as a defendant has been allowed on the finding that it is a 'proper party' in thissuit.2. The plaintiffs have filed the suit against the defendants for partition of the properties. One of such properties is house No. 8 (new Nos. 285 and 286), Chakarbhata Ward, Sagar. According to the plaintiffs this house is the joint family property of the parties and on the basis of an order dated 23-3-2001 of the Trial Court they are reconstructing the house. The case of the intervenor is that this house is the property of the Public Trust and it has been declared as such in earlier Civil Suit No. 5-A of 1972 by the judgment and decree dated 4-3-1976. After the decision in this civil suit the trust was registered as a Public Trust and the house in dispute is e...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Jayshree Joshi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ1245; 2002(1)MPLJ547
Bhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sehore, in M.C.C. No. 80 of 2000, dated 19.2.2001.2. Jayshree Joshi (now deceased), was employed with appellants. On 15.11.1999, at about 4.45 p.m., Rajendra Prasad Temle, driver of the appellants, was driving jeep No. MPZ 9133. While negotiating the railway crossing, the trolley attached to the jeep got detached. Jayshree Joshi, who was going to her residence, got panicky and fell down on the road. However, she was hit by the trolley. Due to this accident, she suffered injuries on her leg, right hand, chest, mouth and other parts of the body. She was admitted in the hospital for treatment of the injuries. In this accident, she lost one of her teeth. She had to engage a servant against monthly payment to look after her. As a result of the injuries, she became permanently incapacitated and claimed compensation of Rs. 16,00,000 from the appellants.3. Case of the appellants was that the ac...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pradeep Kumar Ganediwal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR361(MP)
1. Heard Shri A. P. Patankar, learned counsel for the appellant on admission.2. This appeal has been preferred, at the instance of the Revenue, under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), against the order dated April 17, 2001, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, whereby the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax exercising powers under Section 263 of the Act, has been allowed.3. Initially, the assessment of the respondent-assessee was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act, showing nil income with certain agricultural income only vide order of the Income-tax Officer dated March 31, 1994. The assessee thought it fit to file revised return declaring total income at Rs. 8,70,000 and reduced the agricultural income by this amount. With an intention to regularise the revised return, the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 148 of the Act. After making detailed enquiry with respect to the agr...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Asnani Vs. Tikamdas and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT230; 2002(2)MPLJ461
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is a second appeal under Section 100, CPC. Arguments on the question of admission heard. 2. Tikamchand son of Laxmibai obtained eviction decree in Civil Suit No, 6-A of 19% against Kishanchand and in execution proceedings of that decree applicant Prakash Asnani submitted an application under Order 21 Rule 97, CPC, expressing his intention to resist the execution of the decree on the ground that Laxmibai, the owner of the house, has let out the suit shop to him as per rent-note dated 22-4-1999 and since then he is in possession of the shop. Laxmibai denied the execution of this rent-note. After an inquiry the executing Court has held by order dated 7-3-2001 that this rent-note is not genuine and Laxmibai has not let out the shop to the applicant and it is still in possession of Kishanchand. That order has been upheld in first appeal under Section 96, CPC. According to Order 21 Rule 103, CPC an order made after adjudication under Order 21 Rule 98, CPC has been...
Tag this Judgment!Sonulal and ors. Vs. Janki Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT131; 2002(1)MPLJ401
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is a revision by the defendants/judgment-debtors against the order dated 6-9-2001 in execution proceedings in Civil Suit No. 35-A of 1981 in theCourt of IIIrd Civil Judge, Class-II, Mandla by which it has been held that the decree passed therein is executable. 2. This civil suit was instituted by Bhaiyalal for possession of the land of Plot No. 50 area 5658 sq. ft. and the houses standing thereon. The Trial Court dismissed it. The First Appellate Court by judgment and decree dated 30-11-1989 in Civil Appeal No. 15-A of 1984 reversed the judgment and decree of the Trial Court but in the last para did not specifically mention the relief granted to the plaintiff. A perusal of the judgment and specially para 28 shows that the conclusion was that the plaintiff is entitled to possession of the land and the houses. An appeal was filed by the defendants before this Court and it was dismissed by the judgment dated 30-7-1998 holding that Bhaiyalal was the owner of the...
Tag this Judgment!Hazarilal (Deceased) Through L.Rs. Ashok Kumar Adalia and ors. Vs. Mun ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT243
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is defendant's first appeal under Section 96, CPC challenging the decree for specific performance of contract for sale of a house.2. It is no longer in dispute that defendant Hazarilal by Ikrarnama dated 17-12-1979 (Ex. P-1) agreed to sell two blocks of house in 8th lane, Itarsi to the plaintiffs for Rs. 23,000/- and received an amount of Rs. 9,000/- from them on that date. The plaintiff No. 1 was living in oneot'the blocks as a tenant of the defendant at a monthly rent of Rs. 54/-. A cheque for Rs. 6,000/- which was to be received by the plaintiff No. 1 from the Labour Court was to be delivered to the defendant within a week. The balance amount of Rs. 8,000/- was to be paid on or before 30-6-1980 and the sale-deed was to be executed and registered on that date. The time was mutually extended upto 5-7-1980 but on that date the sale-deed was not executed. There was exchange of various notices between the parties.3. The plaintiffs case is that they were always ready...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »