Madhya Pradesh Court June 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.
Najma Arif Vs. Managing Committee, Army School, Sagar Cantonment and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2004
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR111]
Arun Mishra, J.1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing an order (P. 4) dated 2nd August, 1991 of termination of her services.Petitioner was appointed as teacher in the Army School, Sagar Cantt, the Board of Management which runs the school. The school is affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education and has been established by the Army Personnel Welfare Society Lukhnow. The institution is receiving, cent percent grant-in-aid by the Central Government (Defence budget). There were several vacancies of teachers. An advertisement was issued. Petitioner applied she was selected on the post of Primary School teacher as per order (P.1) dated 29-9-1988. The qualification which was prescribed, in the advertisement was that candidate should have passed matriculation, B.A., B.Sc. and extra qualification was degree in Education or B.T. Petitioner was appointed on the post of teacher after she was selected by the Interview Board. There was no condition in the appointmen...
Hanuman Prasad Gupta Vs. Jagya Bhan Gupta and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-2004
Reported in: AIR2004MP244; 2005(1)MPLJ546
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. By this appeal the appellant/ plaintiff has assailed the order dated 16-10-1997 passed by the trial Court rejecting his application filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151, CPC.2. A suit for specific performance of contract and to declare the sale-deed dated 4-9-1997 executed by respondent No. 1 in favour of respondent No. 2 to be null and void, has been filed by the plaintiff/appellant. The plaintiff has also filed an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC, praying therein that till the disposal of the suit the defendants may not create any hindrance in the peaceful possession of plaintiff on the suit property.3. According to the plaint averments and the application filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC, the defendant No. 1, Jagya Bhan Gupta, was the owner of the suit property.Since he was in need of money as a result of which on 27-6-1996 he mortgaged the suit property in favour of plaintiffs father Bhola Prasad Gupta and deliv...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)190CTR(MP)207; [2005]272ITR553(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (IT Department) under Section 260A of the IT Act, against the orders dt. 14th Nov., 2003, passed by Tribunal in ITA No. 1036/Ind/1997 and ITA No. 7/Ind/1998.2. The question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether appeal involves any substantial question of law out of the impugned order of the Tribunal, or in other words, whether two questions proposed by the appellant involve any substantial questions so as to admit the appeal? It is not in dispute that the prerequisite of admitting any appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act is to find out involvement of substantial question of law.3. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant.4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and having perused record of the case, we are of the view that appeal does not involve any substantial question of law as is required to be made out under Section 260A of the Act and hence it merits dismissal in limine, resultin...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kantilal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)190CTR(MP)210; [2005]273ITR90(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (IT Department) under Section 260A of the IT Act against an order, dt. 21st Nov., 2003, passed by Tribunal, in IT(SS)A No. 6/Ind/2002.2. In short, the question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether this appeal involves any substantial question of law as is required to be made out under Section 260A of the Act that being the prerequisite for admission of appeal.3. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant.4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and having perused record of the case, we are of the opinion that the appeal does not involve any substantial question of law for consideration in this appeal and that two questi6ns proposed by the appellant (Revenue) do not satisfy the rigour of substantial question of law within the meaning of Section 260A of the Act.5. The issue relates to grant of certain deletion which were made by the AO in the course of block 'assessment proceedings initiated...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Oriental Trading Corporation
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)190CTR(MP)544; [2004]270ITR564(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. This is a reference made at the instance of Revenue (CIT) under Section 256(1) of the IT Act to this Court for answering the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled for registration ?'2. The respondent is an assessee. It is a firm. The assessee for the asst. yr. 1980-81, made an application for registration of their firm as contemplated under Section 185 of the IT Act on the strength of deed of partnership dt. 5th July, 1979. For the earlier assessment year the constitution of the firm was different than the one applied for. In the year in question, two individual persons were representing their respective HUFs, which was not in earlier years. Some partners who were in the last year had retired. This, in fact, was the change in the constitution of earlier year's partnership and that of the year in question. The AO refused to grant registration to the firm saying that assessee failed to prov...
Dr. M.L. Goyal Vs. Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwavidhyalaya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR98]; 2004(4)MPHT36; 2004(4)MPLJ202
ORDERS.K. Seth, J.1. In this writ petition, under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner is assailing the order of compulsory retirement passed by the respondents.2. Petitioner initially entered the Government service in the year 1964 as Agriculture Extension Officer but later on he was absorbed as Lecturer in the Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwavidhyalaya (hereinafter referred to as 'University') w.e.f. 1-12-1966 vide order dated 16-10-1970. Petitioner served in that capacity until the order impugned was passed. Statutes framed by the University govern service conditions of the University employees. In the present case, we are concerned with Statute No. 11, which empowers the University to retire any employee before the normal age of superannuation. Exercising that power, order impugned has been issued retiring petitioner from service after he had completed age of 55 years.3. I have heard Shri G.S. Patwardhan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri B.L. Pavecha, l...
Pan Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M.P. State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT71; 2004(4)MPLJ467
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The challenge in this petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is to the bills/demand raised (Annexure P-10-A, B and C) by the respondents on the petitioner for the month of June, July and August, 2001 towards electricity and other charges as specified in these bills.2. The petitioner is a H.T. consumer of electricity. They have entered into an agreement (Annexures P-2 and P-3) with the Board for supply of 974 KVA as also 124 KVA to their Unit. According to petitioner they have also installed transformer having a capacity of 1000 KVA for running their Unit. It is the case of petitioner that on 25-6-2001, the transformer installed by them was blown due to which they were unable to consume the electricity and run the plant. The petitioner, therefore, requested the Board to allow them to reduce their contract demand from 1100 KVA to 60 KVA by their letter, dated 25-6-2001 (Annexure P-4). It is the case of petitioner that instead of acceding t...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(MP)522; [2004]270ITR336(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a reference made at the instance of the assessee under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to answer the following question of law referred by. the Tribunal (Income-tax Appellate Tribunal) arising out of their order, dated May 23, 1997, in Appeals Nos. 1 and 2/Ind of 1991 (annexure D) :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the export subsidy granted to the assessee by the Reserve Bank of India does not lose the character of interest though it is not paid by the borrower and the same is, therefore, includible in chargeable interest under the Interest-tax Act, 1974 ?' 2. The assessee is a nationalised bank. It is a subsidiary of the State Bank of India. The assessee-bank in its day-to-day banking activity is required to advance credit to several exporters engaged in export business on lesser rate of interest. The Reserve Bank of India then on their part pay the amount to the a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(MP)150; [2005]273ITR268(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, filed by the Revenue (Income-tax Department) against an order dated November 24, 2003, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, in I .T. A. No. 366/IND of 1998.2. Heard Shri R. L. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant.3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the record of the case, we find no merit in the appeal. In other words, we have not been able to notice any substantial question of law in the appeal and since the pre-requisite to entertain the appeal being not present in the appeal ; the same deserves to be dismissed in limine.4. The dispute in substance relates to deleting the disallowance of Rs. 63,363 in respect of interest free loan advanced by the assessee (respondent herein) to one of its sister concern Techno Cast Pvt. Ltd. out of their C. C. loan account. The Assessing Officer did not allow this deduction and added in the income of the assessee holding that...
Vinod Kumar and anr. Vs. Nayan Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC196
P.C. Agarwal, J.1. Both these appeals are by the owner-cum-driver of the mini truck No. M.P.-09/KB/3248 which met with an accident on 1.12.1999 injuring Nayansingh (R-1) in M.A. No. 1191/2002 and Sanjay Yadav (R-l) in M.A. No. 1195/2002 with certain others. Accident Claims Tribunal, Barwani by a common order dated 22.4.2002 awarded Rs. 26,500/- with interest 10% per annum to Sanjay Yadav and Rs. 44,207/- with interest 9% per annum to Nayan Singh while exonerating the New India Assurance Company Limited (the Insurance Company). As per claim both claimants had been travelling in the mini truck as owners of goods. Narayansingh had Jawar and fertilizer while Sanjay Yadav had bags of spices with him. According to both of them due to rash and negligent driving by Poonamchand (A-2) the vehicle had overturned injuring both of them and other passengers going towards village Keli market. Both Nayan Singh (R-1) and Sanjay Yadav (R-2) had claimed that they had suffered grievous injuries.2. The Tri...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »