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.
Alhaj Iftekhar Ahmad Vs. M.P. Wakf Board and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2005
Reported in: AIR2005MP220
ORDERS.K. Pande, J.1. This revision under Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act 1995 (hereinafter referred to 'the Act' for short) is directed against the order dated 15-7-03 passed by the State Wakf Tribunal, Bhopal in Case No. 4/03.2. Applicant was Mutawalli of Wakf Madarsa Diniyat Jinsi Jahangirabad, Bhopal. Non-applicant-Board vide order dated 2-5-03 removed Mm from the office of Mutawalli. Therefore, applicant preferred an appeal under Section 64(4) of the Act before the Tribunal stating inter alia that the non-applicant-Board did not conduct enquiry contemplated under Section 64(3) of the Act. As such the order of removal from the office of Mutawalli is, illegal. The Tribunal below vide impugned order held that non-applicant-Board issued the show cause notice dated 27-8-02 to the applicant. Considering the reply submitted by the applicant the Board directed an enquiry to be conducted by OSD and on the basis of report found the applicant guilty of mismanagement of the Wakf. Therefore, as ...
Kamalkishore and anr. Vs. Jagannath Prasad and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2005
Reported in: AIR2005MP221
ORDERS.K. Pande, J.1. This revision Under Section. 115 C.P.C- / is directed against the order dated 6-9-03, passed by District Judge, Sehqre instituted l-A/01.2. Plaintiff/non-applicant Late. Jagan nath Prasad and Smt. Rajgunni instituted C.S. No. 1-A/01 seeking declaration of nullity of registered sale deeds dated 8-7-99 said to have been executed by plaintiff Late Jagannath Prasad on the ground that de fendant/applicants got executed the registered sale deeds aforesaid by practicing fraud and misrepresentation. As per-para 15 of the plaint (Annexure A-1), fixed Court fees for declaration and injunction has been paid. Defendant applicants inter alia contended that the registered sale deeds dated 8-7-99 were executed in their favour for a consideration of Rs. 2,10,000/-, therefore, under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Court Fees Act, plaintiff/non-applicants are required to pay ad valorem Court fees. The Court below vide impugned order dated 6-9-03 held that payment of ad valorem Court fees f...
Anil Kumar Vs. thekardum
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2005
Reported in: AIR2006MP73
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 24-11-2003, passed in Civil Suit No. 33-A/2003 by District Judge Mandla, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Order XXXIV, Rules 1 & 2, CPC has been dismissed, the present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that the plaintiff/appellant filed civil suit for specific performance of the agreement dated 19-6-2002, whereby the appellant/plaintiff entered into an agreement with respondent No. 1 to sell the suit property for a sum of Rs. 4,00,400/- and paid a sum of Rs. 21,000/-as earnest money and also obtained the possession of the suit property. It was alleged by the plaintiff/appellant in the plaint that a sum of Rs. 2,23,500/- was paid from time to time right from 19-6-2002 to 21-10-2002. When respondent No. 1 refused to execute the sale deed in spite of notice in favour of plaintiff/appellant and also executed the sale deed in favour of respondent No. 6 on 8-5-2003, the suit was filed along with an...
R.P. Senghal Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT163; 2005(2)MPLJ68
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. These civil revisions being interlinked and interconnected were heard analogously and disposed of by this common order.2. The facts which are requisite to be stated for disposal of the aforesaid Civil Revisions are that four separate contracts for collection of raw material on Jabalpur Nagpur Road, National Highway No. 7 in certain Kms. were awarded to one Late B.P. Sangel and accordingly four separate work orders were issued in his name. Stipulated period for completion of the work was six months. The contractor had completed the works in the stipulated period but payments were not made by the owner to him. B.P. Sengal breathed his last on 5-1-1982 and thereafter his son R.P. Sangal filed four reference petitions regarding the claims arising under those agreements before the M.P. Arbitration Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'). Before the Tribunal claims were put forth on various heads. The owner resisted the claims by entering into the contest and raised prelim...
Bullu Alias Janki Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT257
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16th August, 1995 of the learned Sessions Judge, Satna in S.T. No. 193/94 by which he has convicted the appellant of the charge under Sections 302 and 381 of the IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and Rs. 1000/- fine and imprisonment for 2 years and Rs. 500/- fine, respectively, thereunder. The judgment also directs further sentence of 6 months on failure to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- and one month on failure to pay fine of Rs. 500/-.2. The evidence in the case is circumstantial. According to the case of the prosecution, on 15-7-1994, accused had been engaged as domestic servant by the deceased Dulari in her house in Rajendra Nagar, Satna. Her son P.W. 7 Pushpendra Singh had gone out to Bombay while her grand-son had gone to his aunt's place. On 17th July, 1994 in the morning, P.W. 2 Thribhuvan Singh was informed that the door of the house of deceased Dulari was closed and inside the house her dead body w...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunita Yadav and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2005
Reported in: II(2005)ACC579; 2006ACJ2617
S.S. Jha and A.K. Gohil, JJ.1. This appeal is filed by the appellant insurance company challenging the award passed by the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Guna.2. Facts of the case are that on 5.6.1989 deceased Radheyshyam, husband of respondent No. 1, son of respondent No. 2 and father of respondent No. 3 was driving truck from Gwalior to Bhopal. On way to Bhopal, near village Bhimkhedi, Police Station Raghogarh, District Guna, MP, the truck overturned on Agra-Bombay Road on account of rains which resulted into the death of Radheyshyam.3. Counsel for the appellant insurance company submitted that the claim petition is not maintainable as Radheyshyam died on account of his own negligence. Application as filed by the heirs of Radheyshyam is not maintainable. Counsel for appellant has referred to the judgment of Apex Court in case of Tamil Nadu State Trans. Corporation v. Natarajan : AIR2003SC2232 and submitted that claimants are not entitled to compensation on account of neglige...
Pranshu Indurkhya (Minor) Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: AIR2005MP152; 2005(2)MPHT95; 2005(2)MPLJ315
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. The appellant (a minor represented by his father) is a student who passed the VIII standard Board Examination held in year 2004. The appellant passed the said examination and obtained 80 marks in Hindi, 77 marks in English, 66 marks in Sanskrit, 75 marks in Mathematics, 84 marks in Social Science and 75 marks in Science (out of 100 marks each). According to the petitioner, the marks awarded to him are far below of his expectation. He claims that he had done extremely well in the examination and was expecting not less than 90% in all these papers. He contends that the lesser marks have denied him the benefit of securing rank and scholarship. He, therefore, approached the District Education Officer, Jabalpur for revaluation of the papers, he received a reply that rules do not provide for revaluation and therefore revaluation was not permitted. The appellant sought retotafling. The appellant was informed that on retotalling, there was no change in the result.2...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kalyan Solvent Extraction Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)475; [2005]276ITR154(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an income-tax reference made at the instance of the Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Tribunal in R. A. No. 162/Ind of 1992 which in turn arose out of an order dated June 5, 1992, in I. T. A. No. 550/Ind of 1989 to answer the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 was without jurisdiction ?'2. The facts in brief as mentioned in the statement of case drawn by the Tribunal need mention infra.3. For the assessment year 1984-85, the Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act on March 13, 1987, in the case of the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer on March 14, 1989, rectified his original assessment order dated March 13, 1987, under Section 154 of the Act in relation to the applicability of Section 80HHC and c...
M/S. Premier Proteins Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: [2008]303ITR169(MP); [2006]155TAXMAN161(MP)
A:M. Sapre, J.1. This is an application made by the assessee under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act consequent upon the dismissal of their application made under section 256(l) of the Act by the Tribunal in R.A. No. 114 and 115/Ind/98 which in turn arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal dated 14-05-1998 in ITA No. 514/lnd/92 and 924/Ind/94 relating to assessment year 1988-89 and 89-90. 2. According to assessee, the Tribunal was not right in dismissing the application made by the assessee under section 256(l) of the Act for making the reference to this court on the questions proposed and hence, need to make this application under section 256(2) of the Act before this Court.3. Heard Ku. V. Kasrekar learned counsel for the assessee and Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the revenue.4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused record of the case, we too are of the view that application does not involve any refera...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indernarayan Jhalani
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2005
Reported in: [2008]303ITR164(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an application made by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, consequent upon the dismissal of his application made under Section 256(1) of the Act in R.A No. 165/Ind/98 by order dated November 30, 1998, which in turn arise out of an order dated July 27, 1998, in I.T.A. No. 646/Ind/94.2. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned Counsel for the Revenue and Shri Nazir Singh learned Counsel for the assessee.3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case, we are inclined to allow this application.4. The question involved in this case relates to the assessment year 1992-93. It pertains to the interpretation of Section 80HHC(3), read with the powers of the Assessing Officer under Section 143(1)(a) and Section 154 of the Act while claiming certain deductions.5. Mere perusal of the impugned orders passed by the Assessing Officer, the Commissio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »