Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Maharishi Vidya Mandir Vs. Ram Prakash Dubey and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ275MP; 2003(4)MPHT328
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 3-6-2002 of the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act in Case No. 4/P.W. Act/2001 by which the earlier Case No. 19/P.W. Act/99 has been restored to its original number and it has been fixed for recording the evidence.2. Respondent No. 1 Ram Prakash Dubey submitted an application under Section 15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') before the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act for a direction to the non-applicant Maharishi Vidya Mandir to pay his salary for the months of April and May, 1999. According to the applicant he was reinstated in service by the Labour Court, Sagar by award dated 16-2-1999 in Case No. 41/97/LD.R. Notice of this application was issued to the non-applicant. In the reply it has been stated by the non-applicant that he has submitted an application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC for setting aside ...
Antarsingh Vs. Ramprakash and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: III(2003)ACC544; 2004ACJ2028
A.K. Gohil, J.1. Appellant-claimant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated 19.4.2001 passed by the Additional M.A.C.T., Dhar in Claim Case No. 4 of 2001 dismissing the claim petition without considering the merits of the case on the ground that the M.A.C.T., Dhar is not having jurisdiction to hear and decide petition filed by the claimant and further directing that if the claimant wants to take back the petition he may do so for its presentation before the competent court having jurisdiction in the matter.2. The following facts in this case are not in dispute for the disposal of this appeal that the accident in question occurred on 4.5.1999 at village Limkheda near Godhra in the State of Gujarat and the claimant, the driver of the vehicle, resides at village Sagwal, Tehsil Sardarpur, District Dhar and the vehicle which met with the accident was insured with respondent No. 2, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. having its branch office at I...
Balvir Singh and anr. Vs. Mahendra Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: I(2006)ACC625; 2005ACJ2120
P.C. Agrawal, J.1. The learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded in all Rs. 36,734.05 with interest at the rate of 10 per cent in favour of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 against the appellants exonerating insurance company, respondent No. 4. Ground taken by the learned Tribunal has been that the motor bus in question was insured as a contract carriage for tours while the same was being used as regular stage carriage and, thus, permit conditions were contravened. He has relied upon Ashok Kumar Agrawal v. Om Prakash, 2000 ACJ 445 (MP), in which case though a jeep registered and insured as a private car was being used as a taxi car and the insurance company was exonerated from the liability.2. The respondent insurance company has relied upon Section 149(2)(a)(i)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, which reads as follows:(a) that there has been a breach of a specified condition of the policy, being one of the following conditions, namely:xxx xxx xxx(c) for a purpose not allowed by the permit unde...
R.C. Bhargava Vs. Madhya Pradesh Dugdh Mahasangh Sahakari Maryadit and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT254
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 16-3-2000 (Annexure P-1) by which the petitioner has been compulsorily retired and it has been further directed that he would not be entitled to pay and allowances from 3-7-1997 onwards on the principle of 'no work no pay'.2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was Joint Director in respondent No. 1 M.P. Dugdh Mahasangh Maryadit, Bhopal. It is a registered Co-operative Society. It comes within the definition of 'Slate' given in Article 12 of the Constitution of India. A departmental enquiry was held against the petitioner on certain charges and the punishment of stoppage of his increments for two years was imposed upon him by the Chairman. The Board of Directors in revision enhanced this punishment to compulsory retirement. The petitioner challenged the order of compulsory retirement in Writ Petition No. 2109 of 1998 on the ground that before enhancement o...
All India State Bank of Indore Officers' Co-ordination Committee and O ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-2003
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(MP)649
Dipak Misra, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions the petitioners have prayed for a declaration that Rule 3 of the IT Rules, 1962 (in short 'the Rules') which has been brought into the existence by Income-tax (Twenty-second Amendment) Rules, 2001 is ultra vires, invalid and inoperative as it runs counter to the provisions contained in Section 17(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act') as a consequence of which it travels beyond the rule-making power as envisaged under Section 295(2) of the Act and further the said rule being discriminatory, is defiant of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Quite apart from the above various other prayers have been putforth. It is also relevant to state here that in certain writ petitions apart from the aforesaid prayer other reliefs have also been sought. As the basic question was common to all the writ petitions they were heard analogously. For the sake of clarity and convenience we are inclined to adumbrate the facts as have been putforth...
Bharati Telenet Ltd. and anr. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-2003
Reported in: [2006]146STC243(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. By this writ petition preferred Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for a declaration that the notification contained in annexure P-4 is violative of Section 3(2) of the M.P. Entry Tax Act, 1976 (for brevity 'the Act'). Quite apart from the above there are series of reliefs claimed in the writ petition.2. Before we advert to the factual matrix of the case we think it condign to refer to our earlier order which would make number of spectrums prismatically clear so that we would not have to adumbrate in detail the facts in issue. In these circumstances we are disposed to reproduce paragraphs 2 to 6 of the aforesaid order.2. Mr. Nair urged with vehemence that during the pendency of A this writ petition, assessment proceeding qua the petitioner-company was completed and, therefore, the company was compelled to file a first appeal before the first appellate authority which also did not yield any results, as a consequence of which...
All India State Bank of Indore Officers' Co-ordination Committee Vs. C ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-2003
Reported in: [2004]134TAXMAN303(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J. In this batch of writ petitions the petitioners have prayed for a declaration that rule 3 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') which has been brought into the existence by Income- tax (Twenty-second Amendment) Rules, 2001 is ultra vires, invalid and inoperative as it runs counter to the provisions contained in section 17(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as a consequence of which it travels beyond the rule making power as envisaged under section 295(2) of the Act and further the said rule being discriminatory is defiant of article 14 of the Constitution of India. Quite apart from the above various other prayers have been putforth. It is also relevant to state here that in certain writ petitions apart from the aforesaid prayer other reliefs have also been sought. As the basic question was common to all the writ petitions they were heard analogously. For the sake of clarity and convenience we are i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›