Madhya Pradesh Court July 2002 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bhagwan Cloth Stores
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(MP)315
ORDER1. This reference is made under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, as it stood before the amendment of 1998, made at the instance of Revenue for resolution of certain questions as mentioned in para 1 of the reference. 2. At the outset it is seen that the amount involved in this reference is a petty amount of Rs. 8,400, covering four assessment years. We are afraid, it was not advisable for the Revenue to seek reference in the case involving such a petty amount. Earlier this Court, vide its order dt. 24th Feb., 1999, in IT Ref. Nos. 69/98 and 70/98 has declined to entertain reference application in a case, which involved an amount of Rs. 13,700. The appeal preferred against the said order of this Court by the Revenue before the Supreme Court was also dismissed. 3. CBDT's circular is there against making reference of a dispute involving less than Rs. 50,000, which is now raised to Rs. 1,00,000. 4. In this view of the matter, we decline to answer the reference, leaving thequestions involv...
Nagar Palika Parishad Vs. Ram Shankar Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-2002
Reported in: AIR2004MP54; 2003(3)MPLJ262
K.K. Lahoti, J. 1. Shri Naman Nagrath, Advocate for the appellant.2. None for the respondent, in spite of service.3. The short question involved in this appeal is whether the appeal filed before the lower appellate Court was competent or not, filed with certified copy of the decree, but without certified copy of the judgment. First appeal was dismissed on the ground that filing of certified copy of Judgment is mandatory and the appeal was incompetent.4. This appeal was admitted on 23-11-1990 on the following substantial question of law :--'Whether the lower appellate Court was right in dismissing the appeal as not properly constituted on the ground of not filing the certified copy of the judgment along with the memorandum of appeal, although certified copy of the decree was filed within limitation and the certified copy of the judgment was filed with an application for condonation of delay?' 5. Learned counsel for the appellant relies on Order 41, Rule 1, CPC.'Form of appeal -- What to...
Smt. Malini Khandkar and Four ors. Vs. Gwalior Distilary Ltd. and Four ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC277
R.B. Dixit, J.1. This appeal is against the award dated 25.1.1996 of Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior, at Dabra, passed in Claim Case No. 13 of 1992. Learned Counsel of the appellants/claimants has submitted that the learned Claims Tribunal erred in assessing the compensation only to the extent of period of retirement of the deceased.2. We have heard the learned Counsels of the parties at length and carefully perused the record. We are of the opinion that the learned Claims Tribunal has also considered compensation considering the post-retiral period.3. Learned Counsel of the appellants further urged that the learned Claims Tribunal has wrongly deducted amount of Rs. 1,660/- from his salary on account of gross income. However, the learned Claims Tribunal has not deducted the amount of family pension which was Rs. 2,000/- per month. On the other hand, it has been held in Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Kashmiran Mathur & Ors. v. Sardar Rajendra Singh a...
Phoolsingh Vs. Mavla @ Bhavaliya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2002MP246; 2002(3)MPHT383; 2002(3)MPLJ326
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J. 1. The applicant has filed this civil revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the interlocutory order dated 3-8-1999 passed in Civil Suit No. 58-A/95 by the Civil Judge, Class-II, Bhikangaon, whereby the Trial Court rejected the application of the plaintiff, I.A. No. 6 under Order XIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and I. A. No. 7 under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act.2. This civil revision was filed on 27-9-1999 and by order dated 23-2-2000 notices were directed to be issued and the proceedings of the Trial Court were stayed. This civil revision came up for hearing on 1-7-2002. On the same day the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999 (No. 46 of 1999) also came into force by Notification dated 6th June, 2002. By Section 12 of this amendment of 1999 (No. 46 of 1999) in Section 115 of the Principal Act, the 'proviso' of Sub-section (1) has been substituted.3. After the enforcement of the amendment w.e.f. 1-7-2002 when thi...
Smt. Jyoti Kewat Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT482
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Gone are the days of yore when the mythical King Sagar was instrumental in procreation of 60,000 sons who were burnt to ashes by the wrath of Kapil Muni and the great devotee King Bhagirath, by his incomparable and inimitable penance, brought Goddess Ganges from the heaven for their salvation. The presentation may be a myth, a symbol or a metaphor or an image to convey an idea or it may be a portrayal of a larger than life situation to strike home a point. The phenomenon as has been depicted may be accepted in a symbolic manner but it cannot be literally construed either to give a denotative meaning or a connotative expanse for the simon pure reason that no one by whatever reason, at present, be permitted to get himself or herself engaged in procreation of this magnitude as that would lead to untold and unimaginable cataclysm and catastrophe.2. At this juncture I may clarify at the cost of repetition that the purpose of putting forth the aforesaid myth is only to...
Ramjan Ali Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC267; 2003ACJ1854
Subhash Samvatsar, J.1. This appeal is filed by the claimant against an award dated 25.11.1997 passed by Additional Member/Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sabalgarh in Claim Case No. 16 of 1997.2. The facts of the case are that the claimant is a registered owner of truck No. MPJ 06-1989. He was driving the said truck on 18.9.1996. The truck tumbled from the bridge and fell in a river. Due to the said accident, appellant was injured and for compensation of the injuries sustained by him, he filed a claim petition before the Claims Tribunal.3. Appellant-applicant filed an application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for grant of interim compensation, on the ground of no fault liability. The said application is rejected by the impugned order. The Claims Tribunal rejected the application for grant of compensation under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by holding that since the claimant himself was driving the vehicle and was owner ...
Jujhar Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT94; 2003(1)MPLJ49
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This revision has been filed by the applicant against the judgment dated 3-6-20002 passed by the First Addl. Sessions Judge, Mandsaur arising out of the order dated 29-1-2002 passed in Cr. Case No. 194/95 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhanpura, thereby convicting the applicant for the offence under Section 25(1-A) of the Arms Act and sentencing him to R.I. for one year.2. The facts of the case in brief are that on 22-6-95, Head Constable Chandrashekhar was on patrolling duty along with Head Constable Gan-gaprasad and Sohanlal. When they were on Bhanpura road, they saw the applicant with a rifle near Gordhanpura-culvert. On inquiry, it was found that the applicant was not having any licence for the said gun. Therefore, the Head Constable Chandrashekhar, in the presence of Chowkidar Ramlal and Panch witness Kanhaiyalal seized the loaded gun on 26-2-95 vide seizure memo Ex. P-1. In the seizure memo crime number was not mentioned because the offence was yet...
Prem Narayan Gupta Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT211; 2003(1)MPLJ122
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 454, Cr.PC by accused Prem Narayan Gupta against that part of the judgment by which the Maruti Van belongingto him has been confiscated under Section 60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Appellant Prem Narayan Gupta and two other persons were prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(i) of the Act and they have been acquitted of this charge by the impugned judgment. It has, however, been held that 1.87 quintals of ganja was recovered from Maruti Van No. M.P. 18/2349 near Village Jamudi and this van is admittedly of the ownership of the appellant. The Trial Court at the time of delivery of the judgment has directed confiscation of this vehicle. 3. None has appeared on behalf of the appellant at the time of hearing of this appeal. Section 60(1) of the Act provides that whenever any offence punishable under Chapter IV [which includes Section 20(...
Dr. Anand Shrivastava and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: II(2002)DMC524
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This revision has been filed by the petitioner/accused persons against the order of framing of charge dated 12.4.2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Neemuch in Cr. Case No. 1002/2000 for quashing the charge and ordering discharge of the applicant-accused persons.2. On a typed complaint dated 19.9.2000 filed by the wife of petitioner No. 1, Dr. Smt. Kalpana Shrivastava as Cr. No. 559/2000 for the offence under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code which was registered by the Police Station, Neemuch. Later on, the charge-sheet has been filed for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 325 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused/petitioners. The petitioner No. 1 was the husband, petitioner No. 2 Shyam Biharilal was the father-in-law, aged about 73 years, a retired person, petitioner No. 3 Smt. Vimla Devi aged about 68 years was the mother-in-law and petitioner No. 4 Shri Gopal Sharma,...
Bhola Vs. Secretary, Deptt. of Home, Govt. of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4046
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. Petitioner seeks writ of certiorari to quash the order of his externment passed by the District Magistrate, Sagar (Annexure P/1) on 14:3-02 from district border of Sagar for a period of six months. An appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the Government of M. P.; that has been dismissed as per order P/2 on 27-5- 02; hence the present writ petition.2. The solitary ground on which the petitioner assails the order passed by the District Magistrate and State of M. P. is that the convictions have been made the basis of externment while passing the order under Section 6 of M. P. Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990. All the convictions relied upon are under Section 4A of Public Gambling Act, 1867 as added by M; P. State Amendment Act No. 47 of 1976. Petitioner's case is that he has not been convicted for an offence under Section 3/4 of Public Gambling Act thrice within three years. Petitioner's submission is that offence under Sections 4 and 4A are different, thus, petitio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »