Madhya Pradesh Court June 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.
Cit Vs. Smt. Shreenbai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2003
Reported in: [2004]134TAXMAN681(MP)
Heard on admission.2. This is an appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') at the instance of the revenue against the order dated 27-3-2002 passed by the Income Tax Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, whereby the application preferred by respondent-assessee under section 254(2) of the Act, has been allowed.3. Learned counsel for appellant strenuously contended that this course amounts to reviewing the earlier order which is not permissible under the law. Reliance has been placed on a judgment of this High Court Dr. Hukumchand Maroti v. CIT : [2002]254ITR602(MP) . After having gone through the said judgment, we are of the opinion that it is not applicable to the facts of that instant case. In fact, in the present case a finding in favour the. respondent-assessee was already recorded in the main order passed by the Tribunal on 13-7-2001. The said main order passed by the Tribunal on 13-7-2001 was not challenged by the revenue at any stage. I...
Babulal Vs. Sheikh Raheem and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC201; 2003(4)MPHT175
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal by claimant against an award dated 30-7-2002, passed by learned Additional Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Khargone, in Claim Case No. 122 of 2001, whereby he has been awarded a sum of Rs. 2300/- towards the injuries and expenses incurred by him consequent upon the injuries that he has suffered. He is not satisfied with what is awarded to him by the Claims Tribunal and has come up in appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for claiming more compensation. So the question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether any case for enhancement is made out and if so, to what extent ?2. Heard Shri P.M. Jain, learned Counsel for the appellant.3. The case of the claimant is dealt with in Paragraph 31 of the impugned award which decides several other claim petitions because all these claim petitions arose out of the same accident in which claimant was also involved. It was held on the basis of the evidence adduced by the parties ...
Gopal Sharma Vs. Kachrulal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC654; 2003(4)MPHT104
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. It is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the claimant against an award dated 30-9-1998 passed by the Second Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur, in Claim Case No. 5/1997 for compensation for the injuries that he suffered in an accident. In the opinion of the learned Claims Tribunal, the claimant failed to prove the negligence of driver of the offending vehicle, i.e., tractor trolley and hence the entire claim application came to be rejected. It is against this rejection, the claimants has come up in appeal.2. Shri Vinay Vijyawargiya, learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri S.V. Dandwate, learned Counsel for the respondent.3. It is not in dispute that the accident in question occurred in the year 1993, i.e., prior to 1994 amendment in the Motor Vehicle Act. It is also not in dispute rather it is the case of the claimant that he was travelling in tractor/trolley (i.e, offending vehicle) as a gratuitous passenger alongwith his f...
Bhanukumar JaIn Vs. Kamal Gupta and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: AIR2004MP25; 2003(4)MPHT124; 2003(3)MPLJ182
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. This civil revision filed under Section 441-F of the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1956'), is directed against the order dated 11-4-2002 passed by XII Additional District Judge, Indore in Election Petition No. 14/2000, whereby the Trial Court has dismissed the petition.2. It is a case of direct election to the post of Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Indore. Admittedly, the election to the office of Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Indore was notified on 25-11-99 and on 2-12-99. The last date for filing the nomination was 3-12-99. The date for scrutiny of nomination was 6-12-99 and the last date for withdrawal of nomination paper was 22-12-99. The election was held on 27-12-99 and the result was declared on 3-1-2000. Respondent No, 3, Kailash Vijayvargiya, amongst other non-applicants, contested the election and was declared elected as Mayor, Indore.Undisputedly, on the date of filing of the nomination paper, i.e., on 3-12-...
Akeel Ahmed Khan Vs. General Manager, State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT167
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J. 1. The object of compassionate appointment is to enable the family of deceased employee to tide over sudden financial crisis due to death of bread earner who left the family in penury and without means of livelihood. As a rule, appointment in the public service may be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of applications through Employment Exchange from the open market on merits. No other mode of appointment nor any consideration is ordinarily permissible. Neither the Govt. nor the public authorities are at liberty to follow any other procedure or relax the qualification laid down by the Rules for the post. However, to this general rule, there are some exceptions carved out in the interest of justice, or in public interest and to meet out certain contingency. One such exception is in favour of dependents of an employee dying in harness and leaving his family in penury and without any means of livelihood. In such cases, out of pure humanitarian consideration...
Prakash Chandra Vs. Kallu Shah
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT475
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. Plaintiff has come up in revision under Section 115 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 6-8-1996, passed by learned Ist Additional District Judge, Ratlam, in C.A. No. 16-B of 1996, which arises out of Civil Suit No. 9-B of 1995, decided by IInd Civil Judge, Class II, Alot, District Ratlam, on 24-1-1996. Plaintiff ('petitioner' herein) filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,652/-against the respondent for recovery of unpaid price of cloth which according to plaintiff, respondent/defendant had purchased from him on several dates between 12-9-1994 to 3-11-1994. According to plaintiff he is engaged in the business of sale of cloth and he sold certain quantity of cloth to the respondent/defendant on credit and made entries in his account books. He then alleged that he sent a notice to defendant to pay unpaid price of cloth sold to respondent/defendant but since defendant did not pay and hence, suit. The defence of the defendant was essentially that of a denial of ...
In Re: Dewas Synthetics (P.) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: [2005]123CompCas214(MP); (2003)4CompLJ423(MP); [2004]49SCL541(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a reference sent by B.I.F.R. to this Court under Section 20(2) of SICA in relation to a company known as Dewas Synthetics (P.) Ltd. ('company') for passing a winding up order to wind up this Company.2. Though this court has entertained the reference on its receipt, it is now pointed out to me by the official liquidator in his report dated 30-4-2003 that the registered office of the company is situated at 66/2, Neemtala Ghat Street, Calcutta. It is also contended that even the inquiries made from Registrar of the Companies reveals that there is no registered office of the Company situated in State of M.P. It is on this basis the O.L. has prayed that in terms of Section 10 of the Companies Act the reference should have been made/sent to concerning High Court i.e. Calcutta High Court and not to this Court which does not possesses the jurisdiction to entertain the reference for passing final orders of winding up.3. I am inclined to accept the prayer made by th...
Narayan Singh Rajput Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT77; 2003(3)MPLJ539
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. The petitioner by this petition has challenged the order (Annexure P-l), dated 6-11-2000 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Kolaras, District Shivpuri, whereby services of the petitioner have been terminated.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as a Panchayat Karmi on 5th October, 1995 on the basis of proper selection in accordance with the statutory rules and regulations. He was thereafter designated as Panchayat Secretary and at the relevant time had been working as Panchayat Secretary. It is the case of the petitioner that in accordance with the provisions of statute conditions of services of a Panchayat Karmi have been prescribed in the scheme and Clause 7 of the aforesaid scheme contemplates the provisions with regard to administrative control of the Gram Panchayat. Departmental action in accordance with the aforesaid provision can be taken against the Panchayat Karmi only by the Gram Panchayat. No other Officer ...
Anil Padegaonkar Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT297; 2004(2)MPLJ15
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. The petitioner was working as Aviation Officer in Management Cadre in Job Group 'A' and was posted at Gwalior Aviation Service Station, in the year 1990 when due to certain misconduct alleged to have been committed by him, a charge-sheet dated 31-12-1993 (Annexure P-12) was issued to him. The charges levelled against the petitioner related to his acting in a manner prejudicial to the interest of the Corporation and neglect of work. The petitioner was asked to submit his reply to the aforesaid charge-sheet within ten days, vide Annexure P-13, dated 6-1-94, the Dy. General Manager, Aviation appointed Enquiry Officer to conduct an enquiry into the allegations levelled in the charge-sheet.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he had asked for certain documents in order to enable him to submit the written statement but without giving him due opportunity, the enquiry was proceeded with. In the meanwhile, while the enquiry into the aforesaid charge-sheet was pendi...
icds Limited Vs. Kamar Trading Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: [2005]128CompCas849(MP); [2004]49SCL600(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a company petition filed under Section 433 of the Companies Act seeking winding up of the respondent company, known as Kamar Trading Co. (P.) Ltd. In substance, the winding up is sought on the allegations that petitioner company being the owner of certain equipments as also vehicles had supplied to respondent-company on hire. It is alleged that to secure the rights/obligation of parties and also to ensure timely payment, two separate agreements were also entered into as hire purchase agreements. It was alleged that since respondent failed to make the payment due as per agreements, the dispute arose between the parties as to the extent of total payment payable by the respondent. To decide this dispute, the matter was referred to a sole arbitrator. The arbitrator then embarked upon the reference made and delivered an award. In terms of an award the respondent was liable to pay a sum of Rs. 8,36,971 to the petitioner. It is this amount, which according to pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »