Madhya Pradesh Court January 2004 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.
Smt. Godavari Bai Vs. Pandit and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT184; 2004(1)MPLJ502
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. This appeal by defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9-12-1993 passed by the learned District Judge, Khandwa in Civil Suit No. 13-A/1988, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance of contract.2. The plaintiffs/respondents alleged in the plaint that defendant Smt. Godawaribai agreed to sell agricultural land owned by her admeasuring 8 acres bearing Khasra No. 424/2 (old) 177 (new) to them for consideration of Rs. 3 lacs out of this, an amount of Rs. 25,000/- was paid on 8-1-1988 towards earnest money. The sale-deeds were to be executed on or before 30th April, 1988 in favour of each plaintiffs for their portions on receiving the balance consideration of Rs. 2,75,000/-, the same to be paid at the time of the registration of the sale-deeds. It has been further averred by the plaintiffs that in spite of repeated requests, the defendant did not execute the sale-deeds. Ultimately registered notices were sent on 12-4-1988 (Ex. P-8...
Arbind Kumar Pandey Vs. M.P. State Agriculture Marketing Board and anr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT45
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. The petitioner aggrieved by the order (Annexure P-5), dated 5-5-2003 passed by respondent M.P. State Agriculture Marketing Board, Bhopal, by which the petitioner who was elected Member Agriculturist of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Panna has been removed from the membership under Section 55 (1) of M.P. Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Adhiniyam'), has filed this petition.2. Short facts of the case are that the petitioner was duly elected as Member Agriculturist of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Panna in the year 2000. Because of certain allegations against the petitioner, the petitioner was served with a show-cause notice (Annexure P-2) on 29-1-2003. The petitioner in place of replying the aforesaid show-cause notice (Annexure P-2), filed an application (Annexure A-4) to respondent No. 1 for supply of copies of certain documents. It is not in dispute that Annexure A-4 was received by the respondents. Respondent No. 1 sent a reply to the a...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Indore Paraspar Sahakari Bank
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2004
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(MP)486
1. This, is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961. The appeal is directed against the order passed by Tribunal, Indore Bench, on 23rd Jan., 2003. By the impugned order, Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee but has rejected the appeal preferred by the Revenue. The matters relate to the asst. yrs. 1997-98 and 1998-99.2. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the question posed in this appeal has already been answered in an identical matter being ITA No. 46 of 2003, decided on 22nd July, 2003. Photocopy thereof has been filed.3. In fact, the matter is covered by the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Ratnagiri District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. : [2002]254ITR697(Bom) which is based upon the decision of the Supreme Court reported in CIT v. Karnataka State Co-operative Apex Bank : [2001]251ITR194(SC) .4. In view of the aforesaid decisions and the earlier order passed in identical matter by this Court, we find no substantial question o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›