Madhya Pradesh Court November 2003 Judgments
Harmit Singh Bhatia Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT101
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. The petitioner aggrieved by the orders passed (a) competent authority and Deputy Divisional Forest Officer, South Sagar Annexure P-9, (b) appellate authority-cum-Conservator of Forest, Sagar Circle Annexure P-10 and (c) the Sessions Judge, Sagar in Criminal Revision No. 218/2000, dated 15-12-2000 Annexure P-11 has preferred this petition for quashment of the aforesaid orders and for release of the truck seized and forfeited by the respondents under Section 14 of M.P. Tendu Patta (Vyapar Vinimay) Adhiniyam, 1964 (hereinafter referred as 'Act').2. The facts of this case are as under :--The petitioner is truck owner of Truck bearing MP 15- D/0320 (hereinafter referred to as 'the truck'). On 8-11-2000 at about 11.45 p.m., the truck was carrying 11 bags of tendu leaves. It is alleged that Ashok Kumar Sahu and Rakesh Sahu loaded the aforesaid bags of tendu leaves from Begumganj to be brought to Sagar. At the relevant time, petitioner was not in the truck and the driver...
Tag this Judgment!Omprakash Bagdia (Huf) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: [2004]267ITR604(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J. 1. The petitioner--an income-tax assessee seeks to challenge the order, dated May 14, 2003 (annexure P 8), passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in this writ. So the question that arises for consideration in this writ is, whether this court should entertain the writ or decline to entertain it on the ground of availability of alternative remedy of appeal under Section 253 of the Income-tax Act to the Appellate Tribunal ?2. Heard Shri P.M. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission.3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused a record of the case, I am not inclined to entertain the writ as in my opinion, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal available to get rid of the impugned first appellate order.4. It is indeed a well settled rule of law judicially so recognised by a series of decisions of the Supreme Court that when an aggrieved person has statutory remedy available to get rid of the o...
Tag this Judgment!Kamlakant Joshi Vs. Santoshbai Pandya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC193
A.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellant-petitioner has filed this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the judgment and decree dated 16.5.1997 in Hindu Marriage Case No. 370/92 passed by IXth Additional District Judge, Indore whereby the decree of judicial separation is passed on the ground of cruelty.2. The admitted facts of the case are that the marriage in between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized according to Hindu rites and customs in the year 1982 and they had one daughter Sapna from the wedlock and the daughter is living with the appellant petitioner. It is also the common ground that the respondent wife has left the matrimonial house and living in her parental house from the year 1991.3. The case of the petitioner is that his wife defendant has sent a notice to him on 13.9.1992 alleging that the petitioner is having the illicit relations with the wife of his brother viz. Radhabai. It is further alleged that the defendant has refused to resume the m...
Tag this Judgment!Bidasaria Brothers Vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Tax and a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: [2004]138STC130(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. By filing this writ under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to assail the two orders, both dated February 7, 2003 annexures H and H-II), passed by the Upper Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Indore in two revisions being No. 74/2002/Indore/State and 36/2002/Indore/ Central. Both these revisions which arose out of an order, passed by the Assistant Commissioner on September 26, 1997 in case Nos. 33 and 31 of 1994 have been dismissed on the ground of limitation.2. The dispute in these two cases relates to the period April 1, 1993 to March 31, 1994. It is relating to imposition of penalty under Commercial Tax Act (formerly as M.P.G.S.T. Act) and Central Sales Tax Act. In the opinion of revisionary authority, the revision filed by the petitioner against the order imposing penalty was barred by time and hence, those revisions were dismissed as being barred by limitation. As a consequence, the question involved in the revision on the merits of th...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Smt. Shantibai and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ313; AIR2005MP66; 2004(1)MPHT329
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 96, CPC by the defendants against judgment and decree by which an amount of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded as compensation to plaintiff No. 1 Shantibai and an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to plaintiff No. 2 Jagrani with interest at the rate of Rs. 12% per annum.2. It is no longer in dispute that on 26-12-1989 in Tehsil Headquarter, Banda in District Sagar there was a strike of the students against the reservation policy of the Government. There was traffic-jam and violence. The police personnel resorted to using tear gas and lathi charge. Even then violence increased and therefore, they fired in the air so that mob may disperse. The bullets from the fire arms of the police hit the two ladies who are the plaintiffs and who were standing on the roof of their house which was at a height of about 10 feet from the ground. These ladies were injured. Shantibai had four fractures in right hip and thigh. Jagrani also sustained fracture in right thigh. T...
Tag this Judgment!Ajay Traders Vs. Birla Jute Industries Ltd. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ARBLR453(MP); 2004(1)MPHT187; 2004(1)MPLJ280
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') for appointment of Arbitrator.2. It is not in dispute that there was an agreement dated 24-3-1997 between the applicant and non-applicants. A photocopy of that agreement is annexed to the application. Clause (7) of that agreement provides as under:--'(7) That, in the event of any dispute or difference arising between parties touching or relating either to the said work or to any other matter or thing arising out of this agreement, the same shall be referred to the President of Satna Cement Works, who alone shall determine and decide the matter and his decision in the matter shall be binding and conclusive upon both the parties.'3. Disputes arose between the parties. The applicant called upon the non-applicants by notice dated 26-3-1998 to refer the dispute to arbitration. A copy of this notice has also been annexed to the applicatio...
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Maravi Vs. Chandrashekhar Mudliyar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT109
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (s), CPC, by the judgment-debtor against that part of order dated 11 -2-2002 by which he has been directed to have recourse to a separate suit for rendition of accounts and for payment of the amount by respondent No. 1 Chandrashekhar Mudliyar.2. It is not in dispute that in Civil Suit No. 32-A of 1984 of the Court of District Judge, Balaghat respondent No. 1 Chandrashekhar Mudliyar was appointed as the receiver under Order 40 Rule 1, CPC on 5-7-1985 and his receiver-ship came to an end on 23-9-1993. He, however, continued in possession of the petrol pump. By the impugned order dated 11-2-2002 the Executing Court directed respondent No. 1 Chandrashekhar Mudliyar to deliver possession of the petrol pump to appellant Naresh Maravi. That order was challenged by me respondent No. 1 in revision before this Court and that has been dismissed. S.L.P. was filed against that order in revision and that has also been dismissed by the Sup...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Electro Graphito Ltd. Vs. M.P. State Electricity Board and a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ARBLR534(MP); 2004(1)MPHT184; 2004(1)MPLJ378
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act') for appointment of the Arbitrator.2. It is not in dispute that there was an agreement dated 9-12-1997 between the parties. It contains an arbitration clause which is as under:--'36. In the event of any dispute or difference arising between the consumer and the Board as regards the interpretation of this Agreement or any other matter arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, except a dispute regarding recovery of charges for energy consumed and any other charges such as minimum charges, miscellaneous and other charges or a dispute regarding any matter for which a method of determination is prescribed in the Acts, Rules, Regulations and Conditions of supply mentioned in Clause 38 hereof such dispute or difference shall be referred to the arbitration of two Arbitrators, one to be appointed by each party hereto, and an umpire...
Tag this Judgment!Sugreeva Prasad Dubey and ors. Vs. Sitaram Dubey
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT488
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. The question raised in this petition is whether in secondary evidence, photo copy of the document, original of which is lost and was inadmissible in evidence, can be permitted ?2. The short facts of the case are that the petitioners are defendants in Civil Suit No. 69-A/1997 pending before Civil Judge Class-I, Sehora. Both the parties are real brothers and dispute is in respect of partition of family property. It is alleged that the father of parties Mooratlal executed a deed in the nature of family settlement on 7-6-1994. The photo-copy of the aforesaid document is filed in the record. It is alleged that the original document was obtained by plaintiff Sitaram from defendant No. 1 Sugreeva Prasad on the pretext that after consultation with his sons, he will settle the matter. Thereafter Sitaram has not returned the document to the defendants. The defendants have also issued a notice to the plaintiff to produce the document, but the plaintiff has not produced the ...
Tag this Judgment!Neelam Sharma and ors. Vs. Braj Mohan Nai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1879
S.S. Jha and S. Samvatsar, JJ. 1. By this judgment both the appeals are decided as they arise out of common award. Misc. Appeal No. 629 of 1999 is filed by the claimants for enhancement of the award whereas Misc. Appeal No. 648 of 1999 is filed by the owner of the vehicle praying that the insurance company be held liable to pay compensation. No other issue is under challenge in these appeals.2. For the purposes of quantum of compensation, counsel for claimants submitted that Claims Tribunal has determined the income of the deceased from agriculture at Rs. 10,000 per annum. Deceased was also earning Rs. 10,000 from other sources. He submitted that in para 17 of the judgment, Claims Tribunal has held that income of deceased from agriculture was Rs. 10,000 per annum and out of Rs. 10,000 from agriculture, family of the deceased is entitled for loss of income at Rs. 5,000 and considering the income of the deceased from selling milk, Claims Tribunal has determined the dependency of the clai...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »