Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Vikaschand Mansingka Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(MP)259
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by an assessee under Section 260A of the IT Act against an order dt. 30th Aug., 2001, passed by Tribunal, Indore, in MA No. 64/Ind/2000. It was admitted for final hearing on following substantial questions of law :'1. Whether Tribunal was justified in not affording an opportunity to an assessee and/or to a counsel to argue an appeal on merits ?2. Whether Tribunal was justified in deciding the appeal on merits despite counsel seeking an adjournment on the ground of no notice of hearing of the appeal ?'2. Heard Shri G.M. Chafekar, learned senior counsel with Shri S.K. Jain, counsel for appellant, and Shri R.L. Jain, learned counsel for respondent.3. Indeed, in view of the nature of two substantial questions of law framed by this Court, we do not consider it necessary to go into the merits and demerits of the issue raised in an appeal which was decided by the Tribunal against an assessee. The only question that arises for consideration in this...
Son Singh Maravi Vs. Ishwar Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: 2005ACJ515; 2004(4)MPHT94; 2004(4)MPLJ223
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. By this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the appellant/claimant has challenged the order passed by the II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandla in Claim Case No. 76/03, rejecting the appellant's application seeking compensation under no fault liability filed under Section 140 of the Motqr Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') holding that the appellant has not suffered any permanent disablement as defined under Section 142 of the Act and the driver was not holding valid driving licence.2. Shri Sanjay Saini, learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the Claims Tribunal has committed gross illegality in rejecting the application ignoring the provisions contained in Sections 140 and 142 of the Act.3. As per the medical certificate filed by the appellant injury suffered by the appellant was 'permanent disfiguration of face' and breaking of teeth.Section 142 of the Act refers to permanent disablement. It re...
Jagdish Prasad Mishra Vs. Bhajan Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ1290; 2004(4)MPHT96; 2004(4)MPLJ152
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. Through this appeal the appellant has challenged the order dated 11-3-1999 passed by the learned II Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewa in Claim Case No. 12/96 by which the Claim Petition of the appellant has been dismissed. 2. The appellant had filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Claims Tribunal seeking compensation for death of his wife Foolmati in an accident which took place on 25-1-1996. The case was fixed on 11 -3 -1999 for recording the evidence of the parties. The Counsel for the appellant requested the Tribunal to adjourn the case on the ground of sickness of the appellant/claimant. The prayer was rejected on the ground that the Counsel has not supported his prayer for adjournment by any evidence, consequently the petition for compensation was dismissed. 3. On perusal of the record I find that the Tribunal has acted with undue haste. On 11-3-1999 for the first time the case was fixed for recording of the ev...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Rukmani Solvex (P) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT229
ORDERA.K. Mishra, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioners have assailed order dated 16-12-2003 (P-4) passed by learned District Judge, Jabalpur, in M.J.C. No. 116/2003. Petitioner M/s. Rukmani Solvex (P) Ltd., has filed an application for appointment of an arbitrator. The very maintainability of the application filed by the respondent was assailed by the United India Insurance Co. on the ground that the matter has been adjudicated by M.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal, hence, the application is not maintainable under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The application was filed relying on a decision in Basant Kumar Dubey v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 2003 (2) MPLJ page 257 and M/s. Fair Air Engineering (P) Ltd. v. N.K. Modi, AIR 1997 SC 533. The learned District Judge has disallowed the application and has asked the Insurer to file reply to the main application on merits.2. Shri Varun Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitt...
Rakesh Kumar and Etc. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1483
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. The two appeals have been preferred by Mithilesh and Rakesh Kumar who were tried and convicted by trial Court. Appellant Mithilesh of Criminal Appeal No. 1069/1990 was held guilty of offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC') and appellant Rakesh Kumar of Criminal Appeal No. 903 of 1990 was found guilty under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. Both the appellants have been directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment of life.2. In brief the case of prosecution is that on 1-11-1983 at 9.30 a.m. one Govind Singh and his cousin brother Mukesh (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') were going to their fields, on the way accused persons met them. Govind Singh made a demand to return Rs. 100/- from accused Rakesh, which he borrowed from him a month earlier to the incident, as a result of which accused persons hurled abuses to said Govind Singh as well as to deceased. Govind Singh refrained the accused persons and asked ...
Deviram and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT182
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. It had been stated long back that there is a beginning in the end and the aforesaid sentence, it we are permitted to say so, has travelled beyond the philosophical and mystical realm to the modern day pragmatism engulfing the encapsuling the necessary aspects of personal liberty which is extremely sanguine and paramount to human existence. When liberty is lost the exclusivity of the soul paves the path of destruction and loud cries do not substitute the soothening and quieting of the soul. May be, for that reason Patrick Henry had proclaimed as under :-'Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery Forbid it, Almighty God I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death !'2. Speaking about the lofty and distinguished essence of liberty the jurists have gone to the extent of stating, even if there would have been prevalent of a barter system, no one would have bartered on bargained ...
Smt. Mamta and ors. Vs. Amarnath Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT149
ORDER1. Heard on M(C)P No. 4837/02 for condonation of delay in filing this appeal.2. On consideration of the cause shown and the benevolent object of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act with regard to the compensation under Sections 166 and 173, the application is allowed and the delay in filing this appeal is condoned.3. With the consent of the parties, the matter was finally heard.4. By this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellants assail the adequacy of the amount of compensation awarded by the Fifth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewa, vide award dated 10-3-1999 in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 49/98.5. The appellant No. 1 is the widow of deceased Maharajdeen Dubey, appellant Nos. 2 to 4 arc his children and appellant No. 5 is his father. Deceased Maharajdeen was working as a driver. It is alleged that on 28-4-95 on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck bearing registration No. MP-17-C/0167, by respondent No. 2, it colli...
National Insurance Company Ltd. and anr. Vs. Smt. Kalloo Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT442
ORDER1. Since the matter was listed for LA. No. 2087/2004 for urgent hearing filed by the learned Counsel for respondents, the matter was finally heard with the consent of the parties,2. This appeal has been filed by the insurer and insured, both, against the award dated 10-5-99 of the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lakhnadon, passed in M.C.C. No. 5/98, by which the said Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,51,000/- to the respondents on account of the death of Hem Singh, husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, in a motor accident.3. As per the case set up by the respondents before the Tribunal in their application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, on 15-3-98 at about 1:00 P.M. the vehicle truck bearing registration No. MP-20-G/0277 driven by Komal Rajak (respondent No. 4) which was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited (appellant No. 1 herein), on account of rash and negligent driving, knocked the deceased Hem Singh. He wa...
Sharma K.P. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR176]; (2005)IILLJ228MP
S.S. Jha and A.K. Gohil, JJ. 1. Heard. Petitioners stood guarantors for one Badri Prasad Mishra to secure house loan from respondent-department. Badri Prasad Mishra was removed from service and thereafter his dues have been recovered from the retirement dues of both the petitioners. They challenged the order of recovery before the Central Administrative Tribunal. Tribunal has held that the recovery is not a service matter and dismissed the petition.2. Contention of counsel for petitioners is that the amount of the borrower deposited in the credit of G.P.F. with the respondents be adjusted towards the outstanding loan and remaining amount can be recovered from their dues. It is further contended by counsel for petitioners that without adjudicating entire matter and without any order for recovery as arrears of land revenue, the recovery is bad in law. No recovery can be made from the retirement dues.3. Counsel for respondents submitted that petitioners have submitted an undertaking that ...
Cit Vs. Shri Laxmikant Flour Industries (P.) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN174(MP)
ORDERSapre, J. This is an appeal filed by the revenue (Income Tax department) under section 260A of the Income Tax Act against an order, dated 13-2-2004, passed by I.T.A.T. in ITA No. 229/IND./97.2. 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 pre-requisite 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 questions 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. As observed supra, the appeal does not involve any substantial question of law. While dismissing the appeal of the revenue...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »