Madhya Pradesh Court January 2005 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.
Samotibai Vs. Dhannalal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: II(2005)ACC137; 2005(2)MPLJ142
ORDERA.K. Awasthy, J.1. The appellant/applicant has filed the misc. appeal against the order dated 12.2.2001 in M.J.C. No. 68/2001 passed by learned First Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mhow, District Indore, whereby the application under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') was rejected.2. The applicant has filed the Claim Case No. 224/1993 on the averments that her husband has died on account of accident due to the rash and negligent driving of Mini Truck No. MP-09/D-8672 and as such the compensation be provided to her from the owner, driver and the Insurance Company jointly and severally. The claim case was dismissed in default of appearance on 2.11.1999. That the application on 26.8.2000 under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code was filed by the applicant-claimant for setting aside the dismissal of the claim on the averments that the appellant is an illiterate rustic lady of the dhil community and on account of the failure of her Counsel to appear ...
Sunil Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT362
ORDERS.L. Jain, J.1. Invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth, 'the Code'), petitioners have filed this petition for quashing the proceedings pending in the Court of Special Judge, Satna in Sessions Trial No. 106/2004 for offences punishable under Section 364, 395, 397, 328 and 120B of the IPC.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 12-1-2004, Tirath Prasad Gupta was kidnapped from Uchehra by certain persons. After investigation, the petitioners and 10 other co- accused were arrested and charge-sheet was filed against them. On the basis of material on record, Special Judge, Satna framed charges against all the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 395, 397, 328 and 120B of the IPC.3. It is the case of the petitioners that they are doing the business of electronics in Naseem Market, Patna and have no concern with the incident or any of the co-accused persons. Petitioners have been arres...
Smt. Shanti Devi (Dead) Through L.Rs. Vs. Dwarka Das
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT405; 2005(2)MPLJ331
S.K. Pande, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment-decree dated 5-8-94, passed by IX ADJ, Bhopal in C.A. No. 47-A/92, affirming the judgment-decree dated 16-4-92, passed by II Civil Judge Class II, Bhopal in C.S. No. 138-A/85, plaintiff/appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 100, CPC.2. The appeal has been heard on the following substantial questions of law :--'(i) Whether in view of the evidence available on record, both the Courts below have erred on the question of law in not decreeing the suit of the appellant for bonafide requirement of the son of the plaintiff/appellant for opening his clinic in the relevant premises ?(ii) Whether both the Courts below have erred in law in not decreeing the suit of the plaintiff on the ground of alleged subletting of the suit premises by the defendant/tenant ?'3. Plaintiff Late Shanti Devi was owner of suit shop No. 7, House No. 11, New Market, T.T. Nagar, Bhopal. Admittedly defendant/respondent remained a tenant of Late Shanti Devi on m...
Ashok Alias Pappu Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2301; 2005(2)MPLJ490
S.L. Kochar, J. 1. The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment passed by Sessions Judge, Shajapur, whereby convicting the appellant under Section 376(2)(f) read with Section 511 of IPC to undergo seven years R. I. with fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further R. I. for three months, in Sessions Trial No. 125/2004 on 27-10-2004.2. The prosecution case in short is that on 7-7-2004 at 1.00 p.m. prosecutrix Ritu aged nine year was studying in her school. She saw that her she-calf was going towards forest upon which she went from the school to catch it. The appellant Ashok was fixing fencing in his field. The prosecutrix Ritu asked the appellant to help her to catch the she-calf. The appellant instead of helping her, made the she-calf to run away on which prosecutrix also tried to follow the she-calf but her way was obstructed by the appellant. Appellant threw her on the ground, thereafter opened his pant as well as undergarment of the prosecutrix...
Nemi Chand and anr. Vs. Pradeep Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ1716
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal No. 283 of 1994 filed by the insurance company and Misc. Appeal No. 276 of 1994 filed by the claimant.2. Deceased Mukesh Kumar was diploma holder in Civil Engineering and was working with the contractor of National Fertilizer Plant. On 30.6.1990 the deceased was returning from duty and was travelling in a jeep No. MP 3227, the said jeep was driven by the driver Pradeep Kumar, respondent No. 1. Shakir Hussain, respondent No. 2, was the owner of the said jeep. The jeep was insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd., the respondent No. 3. The driver of the jeep was driving the jeep rashly and negligently. He made attempt to overtake a vehicle. As a result, deceased Mukesh Kumar was thrown out from the jeep and he was crushed by the truck, which was coming behind the jeep and he died. Deceased was unmarried. He was getting salary of Rs. 2,800 per month. The claim was contested on the ground that no accident took place w...
Commissioner Vs. Bhagirath Bros.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: [2006]150TAXMAN489(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.This is an appeal filed by the revenue (Income-tax department) under section 260A of the Income Tax Act against an order, dated 26-7-2000, passed by I.T.A.T. in I.T.A. No. 304/IND/95 for the assessment year 1987-88.2. 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 senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Himanshu Joshi, learned counsel for the assessee.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 2...
Prestige Feed Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: [2008]297ITR344(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against an order dated September 17, 2004, passed by the Tribunal (ITAT) in Miscellaneous Application No. 31/Ind/04, rejecting the prayer made by the assessee for rectification of order dated April 29, 2004, passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 741/Ind/98.2. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether appeal involves any substantial question of law as is required to be made out under Section 260A of the Act. Since in order to entertain and admit the appeal, the finding out of substantial question of law is a mandatory requirement of law, i.e., Section 260A of the Act, it is obligatory on our part to first find out this question and then proceed by formulating this question. Since, this exercise has not yet been undertaken and hence, the appeal was fixed for this purpose.3. Heard Shri R.T. Thanevala, learned Counsel for the appellant/assessee.4. Having...
Abdul Hafij Kha Vs. Bhuralal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2005
Reported in: II(2005)ACC91; 2005(2)MPHT22
ORDERA.K. Awasthy, J.1. The appellant/claimant has filed the appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the enhancement of the amount of Award dated 29-9-1998 in M.A.C.C. No. 295/1997 passed by learned IInd Additional Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur, wherein the compensation of Rs. 30,000.00 was provided to the appellant with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing the claim petition.2. The case of the claimant is that on 3-11-1996 when he was going in a jeep to Ajmer, the Truck No. RJ 30-G-0045 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 collided with the jeep and the appellant has received the fracture of his right leg. That respondent No. 2 was the owner and respondent No. 3 was the insurer of the Truck. That the claimant is a school teacher and he was unable to join the duties for six months and he has incurred the expenses of Rs. 20,000.00 in his treatment and as such the compensation of amount of Rs. 4,55,000.00 be provided to him jo...
Punjab and Sind Bank Vs. Laxman Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)BC49
S.S. Jha, J.1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff Bank challenging the judgment of the Trial Court where by the Trial Court has held that the suit against the guarantor is barred by limitation. Trial Court has decreed the suit against the borrower-respondent No. 1 and dismissed the suit against the guarantor as well as legal representatives against another guarantor.2. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Trial Court has recorded a finding that original agreement was executed on 24.6.1981 and thereafter Laxmansingh (borrower), has acknowledged the debt on 13.3.1984. Subsequent revival note was executed on 2.3.1987. Suit was filed within three years from 2.3.1987. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Trial Court has committed an error in holding that since the revival letter was signed by the borrower Laxmansingh only, therefore, limitation will not be extended to the guarantors. He submitted that this finding is contrary to law and contrary to the provisions of Secti...
Ashok and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT262
A.K. Awasthy, J. 1. Appellants have filed the appeal under Section 374 of the Cr.PC against the judgment and order dated 30-11-96 in S.T. No. 185/92 by Additional Sessions Judge, Rajgarh against the conviction and sentence under Section 302/34, IPC for the imprisonment for life and payment of fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine rigorous imprisonment for 1-1 year's.2. The prosecution case is that the appellants and Ashok were staying in Room No. 143 of Anand Lodge, Biaora and on 15-9-92 at about 5 PM on the counter of the Lodge before Manager Suresh (P.W. 5) appellants and Ashok had quarrel on the demand of money and thereafter the appellants accused alongwith said Ashok went to the Room No. 143 of the Lodge. That Manager Suresh (P.W. 5) and the servants of the Lodge Manoj (P.W. 1) and Rambabu (P.W. 6) heard the noise of the quarrel from Room No. 143. That after some time, the appellants were seen by Manoj (P.W. 1), Suresh (P.W. 5) and Rambabu (P.W. 6) carrying th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »