Madhya Pradesh Court October 2003 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.
Cgt Vs. Banshilal Narsidas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-2003
Reported in: [2004]137TAXMAN358(MP)
ORDERK. Rajaratnam, CJ.The assessee, Banshilal Narsidas, a Hindu Undivided Family (hereinafter referred to as the 'HUF') consisting of Banshilal, his five sons and wife, gifted gold ornaments valued at Rs. 29,075 in favour of his wife, Smt. Venubai, on 5-11-1980 out of the funds and entered the factum of gift in the books of account of HUF. He filed return in respect of the gift-tax in the status of an HUF and claimed exemption under section 5(1)(viii) of the Gift Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') raising a contention that he, as the 'karta' of the HUF, had gifted the gold ornaments belonging to the HUF in favour of his wife and he could have done so in law. The claim was negatived by the Gift Tax Officer on the foundation that it was not a gift by an individual to his wife but was a gift by the 'karta' of the HUF to one of the members of the HUF out of the assets of the HUF and, therefore, exemption under section 5(1)(viii) of the Act was not permissible.2. Being gr...
State of M.P. and ors. Vs. Siyaram Verma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2003
Reported in: AIR2004MP174; 2004(1)CTLJ356(MP); 2004(1)MPLJ130
1. This appeal is filed by the defendants challenging judgment and decree, dated 28-10-93, passed by First Additional Judge, to the District Judge, Shivpuri in Civil Suit No. 8A/88, whereby the Court below has passed a decree for declaration that the defendants have no right to recover an amount of Rs. 2,79,000/- by way of Revenue Recovery Certificate (R.R.C. for short).2. The facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that the R.R.C. issued by the defendants for recovery of an amount of Rs. 2,79,000/- is illegal and void and the said amount cannot be recovered by issuing R.R.C. The plaintiff in his plaint has alleged that the defendant No. 2 i.e. Executive Engineer, P.W.D. National High Way, Shivpuri had issued tenders for recovery of toll tax on the bridge constructed at Agra-Bombay Road known as Janjali Bridge for a period from 1-6-87 to 31-3-88. The off-set price for auction was fixed at Rs. 16,80,000/-. An amount of Rs. 16,800/- was paid by th...
Lalloo Ram Vs. Ram Babu Kamariya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC271; 2005ACJ1755
S.S. Jha and S. Samvatsar, JJ.1. This appeal is filed by claimants against the dismissal of their claim petition. Appellant contended that he was travelling in a bus bearing No. MPH 845 owned by respondent No. 2. He was travelling from village Kitora to Morar. The bus overturned between village Utila and Bancha and he suffered serious injuries. He has suffered fracture on the left shoulder and in the left palm. He was admitted in J.A. Group of Hospitals and discharged from the hospital. In para 6 of the petition, he has mentioned that he has suffered fracture on three points. He had claimed compensation of Rs. 1,58,000. The owner and driver of the vehicle after service have not appeared before the Claims Tribunal and they were proceeded ex parte. Insurance company has filed their reply.2. AW 1 categorically deposed that the bus was being driven in a rash and negligent manner which resulted into overturning of the bus and caused injuries to him. He was admitted in the J.A. Group of Hosp...
Chittar Singh Lodhi and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT542; 2004(1)MPLJ160
S.P. Khare, J.1. The appellants have been convicted under Section 325/34, IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment lor three years and to pay a fine of Rs. l,000/-each.2. The prosecution case was that on 14-6-2001 Bhujbal Singh (P.W. 1) was ploughing his land known as 'Chandvarhar' at about 10.00 a.m. At that time accused Chittar Singh, Gokal Singh and Malti Bai came there. Accused Chittar Singh asked Bhujbal Singh (P.W. 1) as to why he was ploughing his land. Both sides claimed that the land belonged to them. Accused Chittar Singh is said to have caused injury to Bhujbal Singh (P.W. 1) with a Katarna. Accused Gokal is alleged to have dealt a blow of rod on him and accused Malti Bai caused injuries to him with a stick. The incident was witnessed by Smt. Shivrani (P.W. 2) and Gulai (P.W. 4). Bhujbal Singh (P.W. 1) lodged the report (Ex. P-1) at Sanodha Police Station on the same date at 12 noon and he was sent to the hospital for medical examination. After investigation the charge-she...
Shri Deo Raghunathji Bada Mandir Vs. Prahlad Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT97; 2003(4)MPLJ27
ORDER1. This is an appeal by the defendant No. 2 under Order 43 Rule 1 (u), CPC against order dated 4-9-2002 in Civil Appeal No. 109-A of 2002 of the IInd Additional District Judge, Camp Khurai, Sagar by which Civil Suit No. 81-A of 1992 has been remanded to the Trial Court.2. Plaintiff Prahlad Singh filed the civil suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of the lands situated in Village Naupura, Tehsil Bina. According to the plaintiff he was granted Patta of these lands by the Sub-Divisional Officer and therefore, he became Bhumiswami of these lands. Subsequently these lands were recorded as 'Charokhar' and these have been given in exchange by the defendant No. 1 State of M.P. to defendant No. 2 Deoraghnathji. In the written statement it was denied that the Patta of the lands was given by the Sub-Divisional Officer to the plaintiff. It is also stated that the alleged Patta is not valid. The Trial Court framed six issues and recorded findings on each issue. Th...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Javitri Devi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2003
Reported in: I(2006)ACC617; 2005ACJ2131
S.S. Jha and Subhash Samvatsar, JJ.1. This appeal is by National Insurance Co. Ltd. challenging its liability to pay compensation.2. In this case, counsel for appellant submitted that deceased Onkar Singh met with an accident on 12.7.1989. Onkar Singh was travelling in a tractor bearing No. CPG 8357. The said tractor was insured with the appellant company. Tractor was driven in a rash and negligent manner which caused death.3. The counsel for appellant submitted that the incident occurred after enforcement of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and before amendment in Motor Vehicles Act, 1994 insurance company is not liable to indemnify the insured as tractor was being driven in violation of the condition of the policy. Counsel for appellant referred to a judgment in Ramji Lal v. Omkar Lal, . This Court while referring to a judgment in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani, : AIR2003SC607 , considered the question and held that the owner of the vehicle carrying passenger must pay ...
Balram Nayak Vs. Janpad Panchayat and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT538; 2004(1)MPLJ42
S.S. Jha, J.1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of Letters Patent Appeal No. 9/99.2. Both appeals arise out of common order passed in Writ Petition No. 530/1996, decided on 16-12-1998.3. Respondent No. 2 Sunil Singh Vaishya (petitioner before the Writ Court) had filed a writ petition before the Single Bench claiming himself to be senior to appellant Balram Nayak and appellant Balram Nayak being junior to him on the post of lower division clerk has wrongly been promoted as upper division clerk ignoring his right of promotion. Another appeal (L.P.A. No. 9/99) has been filed by Janpad Panchayat, Isagarh challenging the order passed by the Single Bench in W.P. No. 530/1996.4. Brief facts of the case are that Sunil Singh Vaishya was appointed as lower division clerk vide order dated 22-2-1990 at Janpad Panchayat, Chachoda whereas Balram Nayak was appointed as lower division clerk vide order dated 25-3-1992 at Janpad Panchayat, Isagarh. Petitioner in the writ petition was transfe...
Vijay Kumar Pandey Vs. Ashok Leylands and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT387
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. By filing this appeal the appellant has challenged the order dated 10-7-2002 passed by IVth Additional District Judge, Rewa in M.C.J. No. 9/99 by which application under Order 33 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the appellant has been rejected.2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal that the appellant purchased a Mini Truck on 17-1-1997 after requesting to his father to sell the land of his share and give him money in cash. His father gave him Rs. 1,10,472/- which was paid by him by demand draft dated 2-11-1997. On getting finance for the rest of the price the amount was paid to the Ashok Leyland Company. After the purchase of the said Truck the appellant discovered many manufacturing defects in it and as such he approached the respondents on several occasions to make the vehicle good but they did not pay any heed to it. The appellant filed a civil suit claiming compensation amounting to Rs. 6,38,100/-.3. In the said suit th...
State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Mayank Pandey and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT43
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the award dated 21-12-1989 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raisen in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 33/1984.2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that on 9-1-1984 at about 12.30 p.m. claimant Mayank Pandey was going on Scooter as a pillion driver from Bhopal to Obedullaganj. At Village Bisnekheda truck bearing registration No. MPZ 7443 owned by appellant No. 1 and driven by respondent No. 2 came from the opposite side and collided with scooter bearing registration No. MBG 1154 on which the claimant was sitting as pillion rider and thereafter also dashed another scooter bearing registration No. MBC 1553. The claimant sustained various injuries. He was taken to Hamidia Hospital where he was operated on 10-1-1984. He sustained fracture in his right hand and right leg. He was operated thrice. Kneeling and bone drafting was done and plaster was put. The claimant claimed compensation for the inju...
Ramsingh Vs. Ramchandra and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT558; 2004(1)MPLJ112
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is defendant's second appeal under Section 100, CPC. The following substantial question of law was formulated by order dated 24-6-85 at the time of admission of this appeal:--'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Court below erred in not holding that the appellant had acquired the Bhumiswami rights by adverse possession ?'2. It is not in dispute that Jagannath was Bhumiswami of Khasra No. 782/2 area 0.020 hectares of Village Jirapur. The plaintiffs are his heirs. Therefore, they became Bhumiswamis of this land after death of Jagannath.3. The plaintiff's case was that defendant Ram Singh dispossessed them in the year 1977. On the other hand the case of the defendant was that he is in possession of this land from the year 1964-65 and he has acquired title to this land by adverse possession. The Trial Court uphold the plea of adverse possession set up by the defendant. But the Appellate Court reversed it on the ground that the possession of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »