Madhya Pradesh Court November 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.
Progressive Career Academy Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Fiitjee Ltd. and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT432; 2006(1)MPLJ347
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J. 1. This is an application filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act' for short)2. As per the applicants, the respondent No. 1 FIITJEE Ltd. is doing business of coaching for IIT-JEE and State Level Engineering Entrance Test (for short 'SLEET') by offering education to aspiring students for success in the said examination/test conducted all over India.3. In order to expand their business the respondents invited interested parties by way of advertisements to make investment in the business and promised handsome and lucrative returns on the investments. As per their scheme they were to authorize franchisee's to use the trade mark, trade name, design, copyright material and technical knowhow for the purposes of setting up franchise centers at different places for providing coaching for IIT-JEE and SLEET. The applicants entered into an agreement with the respondents on 26-7-2001 (Annexure A-1) for setting up franchise center at Jab...
Raj Kumar Goyal Vs. Prayag NaraIn Sharma and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC215; 2006ACJ1817
P.K. Jaiswal, J.1. This Order shall govern the orders in all the seven appeals as they arise out of common award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. All the appeals are filed against the impugned award dated 31.1.2000 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Morena. All the appeals are filed for enhancement of compensation, Other findings recorded by Claims Tribunal are not under challenge. These appeals are confined to quantum of compensation.2. Misc. Appeal No. 632 of 2000 has been filed by the parents of the deceased Chhaya and the other appeals were filed by the claimants-injured,3. Claimants had submitted a claim that on 28.3.1994, Raj Kumar Goyal, Seema Jain, Rakesh alias Rajesh Jain, Darshanlal Jain, Rani Devi Jain, Gaurav Jain, Mohani Jain, Padam Chand Jain and others were returning from Sonagiri to Morena in jeep bearing registration No. MP 06-B 0024.The jeep was driven in a rash and negligent manner by the jeep driver which collided with the tractor-trolley b...
R.J. Foujdar Bus Service Vs. Ganpat Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Reported in: 2007ACJ1591
Arun Mishra, J.1. These appeals arise out of same accident, hence are being decided by the common order.2. Three claim cases were filed. In one of the cases Shyama Bai aged 35 years had died and in other claim cases her sons Golu aged 3 years and Bhura, a student of class III, have died.3. It was averred in the claim petition that on 13.8.1992 the deceased were travelling in a bus. Bus was driven by Phoolchand, owned by R.J. Foujdar Bus Service and insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. When bus was taken by the driver on the bridge on which water was overflowing due to rain bus was washed away. The dead body of Bhura could not be found whereas dead bodies of Shyama Bai and Golu were found. It was due to rash and negligent driving of Phoolchand that the accident took place.4. It was submitted that Shyama Bai was doing the work of stitching. In addition she used to look after the agriculture and cattle and was contributing in other household affairs. She was earning a sum of Rs. 18,0...
Bhagwati Bai and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT320; 2004(3)MPLJ200
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are assailing the order Annexure P-1, dated 3rd August, 1994 passed in Revision No. 206/Four-90 by the Board of Revenue, M.P., Gwalior rejecting the prayer of petitioners to take the matter in suo motu against the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur in Case No. 255/A-90/B-3/74-75.2. An application under Section 42 of the M.P. Ceiling of Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960(in short 'the Act') was submitted by the petitioners before the Board of Revenue praying therein that the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Jabalpur in Case No. 255/A-90/B-3/74-75 be set aside. Though the application which was filed by the petitioners before the Board of Revenue has not been annexed to this petition, but on going through the order it is revealed that the contention of petitioners is that land in question is Joint Hindu Family property, theref...
Farkamal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(MP)474; [2008]296ITR585(MP)
ORDERS.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. This reference has been received from the Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore under the provisions of Section 256(1), in pursuance of the direction issued by the apex Court, by order dt. 9th Nov., 2001, to refer the following questions of law for decision of this Court :1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is any basis in law for addition of the two sums of Rs. 50,000 as income of the assessee in the relevant year ?2. Whether the mere omission on the part of the assessee to include the sum of Rs. 50,000 withdrawn from the bank in his cash book can lead to the inference, in law, that the amount represented his income ?3. Whether the mere finding that the cash book was unreliable can justify in law the addition of the two sums as income without any independent evidence?2. The applicant-assessee is a firm in the name and style of M/s Farkamal, Indore. The matter relates to the asst. yr. 1983-84, relevant to the previous year from 1st Jan., 1...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(MP)380; [2006]282ITR409(MP)
ORDER1. This order shall also govern disposal of IT Appeal No. 39 of 2000, as both the appeals relate to the same assessee and raise identical questions of law.2. The appellant, State Bank of Indore has filed these appeals under the provisions of Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961, which have been admitted on the following questions of law :(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in confirming the action of AO (respondent No. 3) of initiating the proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act ?;(b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, notice under Section 147 was bad in law and without jurisdiction ?;(c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions under Section 147 without existence of conditions mentioned under els. (a) and (b) of the said section and merely by applying Clause (c) to Expln. 2 of that section justify the initiation of proceedings ?;(d) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, th...
Ramdas Jugani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(MP)282; [2006]282ITR356(MP)
Shantanu Kemkar J.1. The petitioner claims to be carrying on the business of medicines at Hoshangabad in the name of M/s. Anand Medical Stores.2. On the basis of a survey dated March 7, 1991, conducted under Section 133B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), by the Assistant Director (Investigation), Bhopal, a notice under Section 142(1) read with Section 148 of the Act was issued to the petitioner on March 18, 1991, by the Income-tax Officer ('the ITO', for short). As the petitioner did not file the return as required under the said notice, the Income-tax Officer completed the ex parte assessment vide orders dated March 23, 1993, for the assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91. The Income-tax Officer exercising the jurisdiction under Section 144 of the Act made best judgment assessment accepting the turnover of the petitioner reflected in the said survey report dated March 7, 1991, (annexure R-1), and assessed income of Rs. 33,700 for the year 1989-90 and worked out a total ...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Itat and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(MP)380; [2005]282ITR409(MP); [2006]152TAXMAN196(MP)
ORDERBy The Court:2. The appellant, State Bank of Indore has filed these appeals under the provisions of section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which have been admitted on the following questions of law :(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in confirming the action of assessing officer (respondent No. 3) of initiating the proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act ?;(b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, notice under section 147 was bad in law and without jurisdiction ?(c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions under section 147 without existence of conditions mentioned under clauses (a) and (b) of the said section and merely by applying clause (c) to Explanation 2 of that section justify the initiation of proceedings ?;(d) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of reopening was merely a change of opinion ?;(e) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, t...
Nirmala Bai Vs. Rameshchandra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2005
Reported in: 2(2006)DMC606
ORDERAshok Kumar Tiwari, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 8.7.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Manavar, District Dhar (M.P.) in Criminal Revision No. 66/2003.2. The applicant/wife filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C, praying for award of Rs. 3,000 per month as the maintenance allowance to her. Her application was registered as M.Cr.C. No. 71/1999 in the Court of JMFC, Manavar, District Dhar. Non-applicant opposed the application by filing written statement. The learned JMFC, after recording the evidence adduced by the parties and after hearing the parties, by order dated 9.4.2003 allowed the application in part and directed to the non-applicant to pay Rs. 1,000 per month for the maintenance of the applicant. The non-applicant husband preferred a revison against the order of graning maintenance to the applicant. His revision was registered as Criminal Revision No. 66/2003. Applicant has also preferred a revision praying for enhanci...
Aasan Vs. Ram Babu Sen and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ2474
Arun Mishra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the claimant for enhancement of compensation aggrieved by an award dated 16.7.1999 passed by the Sixth Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal, in M.C.C. No. 13 of 1998.2. In accident dated 19.12.1997 when claimant Aasan alias Aasar was travelling in a minibus (MP 04-H 7715) from Gandhi Nagar to Bhopal, the minibus was driven by Mohd. Ateek and when it reached Lalghati Railway Crossing near Rajeev Nursery, Ram Babu Sen came from Bhopal side towards Gandhi Nagar at excessive speed, he was driving the jeep (MP 04-H 5871) violating the traffic rules, he came in front of minibus and turned towards the wrong direction, in order to avoid collision the driver of minibus, namely, Mohd. Ateek also turned the minibus, owing to which it turned turtle. Claimants and other persons travelling in minibus sustained injuries. The claimant was taken to Hamidia Hospital, where his left leg was amputated above knee level and two fingers of his righ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »