Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
ito Vs. Phul Chand Kachur Lal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-2004
Reported in: [2005]143TAXMAN229(MP)
ORDERAM. Sapre, J:This is an appeal filed by the revenue (CIT) under section 260A of the Income Tax Act against an order dated 29-10-1998, passed by Tribunal in ITA No. 1083/Ind/1994. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law by this court on 8-5-2000:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the interest on the debit balance in the accounts of the partners and the members of the family concerned even when no interest was charged by the assessee-firm ?'2 ' Record perused, because none appeared for the parties despite notice of the appeal.3. Having perused record of the case and in particular the order of Tribunal impugned, we are of the view that this appeal has no substance.4. As a matter of fact, the revenue itself has conceded before the Tribunal that the issue has already been decided against the revenue in the case of this very assessee in the earlier years by the Tribunal and no ap...
Suresh Kumar Saxena Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT430
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. The petitioner retired from service as Inspector General of Police on 31-3-2002. On 30-4-2003, H.K. Kalchuri Education Trust, Bhopal appointed him as an 'Adviser' for a period of one year from 11-5-2003 on contract basis on a monthly pay of Rs. 16,000/- plus vehicle allowance Rs. 4,000/-. On joining the said position, the petitioner sent a communication dated 1-5-2003 informing the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of M.P. that he has joined the said post of Adviser on 1-5-2003. In the annexure to the said letter he described his duties as 'to impart advice to Education Trust for upgrading the general administration of technical standard of Engineering Colleges run by the trust'.2. The said communication was sent apparently to meet the requirements of Rule 26 of All India Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 ('Rules' for short), relevant portions of which read as under :--'26. Acceptance of employment after retirement.-- (1) A ...
Smt. Meera Vs. Smt. Heera Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT37; 2004(4)MPLJ366
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. This appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (u) of the Code of Civil Procedure has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 25-10-2002 passed by the learned VI Additional District Judge, Sagar, in Civil Appeal No. 28-A/2002 setting aside the order dated 16-8-2002 passed by II Civil Judge, Class-II, Sagar in Civil Suit No. 13-A/2000.2. Shortly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents/plaintiffs filed a civil suit alleging that the plaintiffs and the defendant are members of joint Hindu family. Kashiram Raj, husband of plaintiff No. 1, father of plaintiff Nos. 2 to 5 purchased a plot out of joint Hindu family property in the name of defendant who is his daughter in law. It is further pleaded that the plaintiff No. 2 is husband of the defendant and because of matrimonial disputes between them the defendant threatened to evict the plaintiffs from the suit property and also trying to sell the suit property. Accordingly, the plaintiffs prayed for following...
General Manager, S.E.C.L. and anr. Vs. Gajanan Wadnekar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ927; [2005(104)FLR618]; 2005(1)MPHT42; 2004(4)MPLJ340
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') by the employers against the award by which they have been directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2,21,619/- as compensation with penalty at the rate of 6% per annum and interest at the rate 25% per annum.2. It is not in dispute that Gajanan Wadnekar was an employee of South Eastern Coalfield Limited (SECL). He was working in its coal mines in Johilla. He was Timber Ma/door in Naurozabad Colliery. On 12-9-1995 he met with an accident in the course of employment in the mines. He suffered 'permanent total disablement' resulting from the injury sustained by him. He was sent for treatment by the employer to Bhilai Steel Plant Hospital and Medical College, Vellore at the costs of the employer. An amount of Rs. 1,08,455/- has been deposited by the employer in the account of the respondent as compensation on 2-3-2000. The respondent was drawing an amount of R...
Meera Vs. Heera Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2004
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN355(MP)
This appeal under order 43, rule I (u) of the Code of Civil Procedure has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 25-10-2002 passed by the learned VI Additional District Judge, Sagar, in Civil Appeal No. 28A/02 setting aside the order dated 16-8-2000 passed by the II Civil Judge, Class II, Sagar, in Civil Suit No. 13A/2000.2. Shortly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents/plaintiffs filed a civil suit alleging that the plaintiff and the defendant are members of joint Hindu family. Kashiram Raj, husband of plaintiff No. 1, father of plaintiff Nos. 2 to 5 purchased a plot out of joint Hindu family property in the name of defendant who is his daughter-in-law. It is further pleaded that the plaintiff No. 2 is husband of the defendant and because of matrimonial disputes between them the defendant threatened to evict the plaintiffs from the suit property and also trying to sell the suit property. Accordingly, the plaintiffs prayed for following reliefs:A. The land ...
Vijay Shankar Tripathi Vs. the Project Officer and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR387]; (2005)IILLJ191MP; 2005(1)MPHT24; 2004(4)MPLJ329
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by appellant Vijay Shankar against the impugned order passed by learned Single Judge dismissing his writ petition and affirming the order passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court (in short 'the Tribunal'), dated 26-8-1998.2. The appellant was appointed on the post of 'Auto Helper Category II' in the year 1984. It is admitted by the parties that the petitioner submitted his resignation vide letter dated 10-9-1991 (Annexure A-1). On going through the resignation letter, it is found that a prayer to accept it immediately was made. According to appellant he did submit the application to withdraw the resignation vide Annexure A-2 on the same day, i.e., 10-9-1991. On going through the withdrawal letter, it is gathered that in a heat of passion, he did submit an application of resignation. However, on the same day, he requested not to accept the resignation, by submitting application of withdrawal. There is a n...
Smt. Lakshmi Nagdev Vs. Jitendra Kumar Nagdev
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT30; 2004(4)MPLJ310
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. By filing this petition under Section 23(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') the petitioner wife is seeking transfer of Matrimonial Suit No. 17-A/04 filed by the respondent husband in the Court of III Additional District Judge, Katni to the Court of competent jurisdiction in District Durg in the State of Chhattisgarh.2. In short the petitioner's case is that her parents arc old and infirm and her brother who is a business man in unable to accompany her to attend the case pending at Kalni. Petitioner has a son aged about two years and there is no-one to lookafter him. The petitioner is residing at Bhilai, District Durg which is more than 465 kms away from Katni. In the aforesaid circumstances it is difficult for her to attend the matrimonial case filed by the respondent at Katni.3. The respondent opposed the prayer on the grounds that- (i) the petitioner approached this Court after a considerable delay, (ii) the Trial Court vid...
In Re: District and Sessions Judge Raisen
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT411; 2005(3)MPLJ26
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, C.J. 1. The District & Sessions Judge, Raisen has forwarded a list of part-heard cases pending on the file of the Fast Track Court, Raisen, with a request to transfer them to some other Court, as the Presiding Officer of that Court has resigned from the post and no other Judicial Officer has been appointed in his place.2. We find that there are divergent views of learned Single Judges in regard to the power of the Sessions Judge to recall and make over the cases to some other Additional Sessions Judge in such a situation. One view is that a part-heard Sessions Trial pending in the Court of an Additional Sessions judge can be transferred to another Additional Sessions Judge in the same Sessions Division only by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 407(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') and not by the Sessions Judge in exercise of powers of transfer under Section 408 of the Code (vide order dated 5-3-2002 in M.Cr.C. No. 1...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bright Automotives and Plastics Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: (2004)192CTR(MP)117; [2005]273ITR59(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this appeal shall also govern disposal of other two connected appeals being IT Appeal Nos. 41 and 44 of 1999 as all these three appeals arise between the same parties, i.e., same assessee (respondent herein) and secondly, the appeals involve more or less common substantial questions of law except the difference being they arise in different assessment years.2. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue, (CIT) under Section 260A of the IT Act against an order dt. 20th Nov., 1998 (wrongly mentioned in memo of appeal as 20th Oct., 1998 at p. 1 of paper book of IT Appeal No. 17 of 1999) passed by Tribunal in IT Appeal No. 974/Ind/1994. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law by this Court on 8th May, 2000 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that provisions of Section 35AB in respect of technical know-how expenses are not attracted as t...
Shrimanth Seth Dharmendra Kumar Vs. Smt. Uma Devi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT412
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Plaintiff, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by First Appellate Court dismissing his suit for eviction has preferred this second appeal.2. A suit for eviction was filed by plaintiff/appellant on the ground envisaged under Section 12(1)(h) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act'). According to the plaint averments the suit accommodation which is a shop is in a dilapidated condition and there are reasonable chances that the accommodation may fall down. Therefore, the plaintiff required the suit accommodation to rebuilt it. The plaintiff further pleaded that he has prepared the plans and he is also having necessary funds for reconstruction.3. The original defendant was Shambhoo Nema who died during the pendency of this second appeal and his legal representatives are brought on record. The defendants resisted the suit by filing written statement. In the written statement, it was admitted by the defendant that the suit shop has ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »