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.
Sarman Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2005
Reported in: I(2006)DMC450
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5.2.1989 convicting the appellant under Sections 304B and 302/201, I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and one year respectively and fine of Rs. 500 in default, further rigorous imprisonment of one month, appellant has knocked the doors of this Court by preferring this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. Appellant No. 1 Rambaran who was the husband of Moharshree (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') breathed his last during the pendency of this appeal as a result of which his name has been deleted from the array of appeal since the appeal was abated against him,3. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that complainant Gangaram s/o Ramkishan is a resident of Gopalpura, Morena. His daughter, the deceased, got married two years earlier to the date of incident to deceased appellant Rambaran, who is son of the ap...
Prakash Mehtar Vs. Gangabai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2005
Reported in: III(2006)ACC379
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by inadequacy of the amount awarded vide award dated 3.2.1998 passed by II MACT, Ratlam in Claim Case No. 5/96 wherein in a motor accident, one Basantilal died, respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed the claim petition and learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,62,000 along with interest @ 12% per annum, the present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that on 15.11.1995, one Matador Tata 608 bearing Registration No. MP I4-B 8458 was going from Ratlam to Namli. This b Matador was being driven by respondent No. 5, owned by respondent No. 6 and insured with respondent No. 7, The another truck bearing No. MPE-1557 was going behind the Metador. This truck was being driven by appellant No. 1, owned by appellant No. 2 and was not insured. From the opposite direction, one truck bearing Registration No. PB 10C 9970 was coming which was driven by respondent No. 8, owned by respondent No. 9 and was insured with respondent No. 10. There was a culvert on...
Magan Vs. Shakil and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC313
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been filed against the award dated 24.9.2001, passed by the learned Member, Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Barwani (M.P.) in Claim Case No. 35/95 by which the claim filed by the appellant praying for awarding compensation to him has been rejected.2. The claimant/appellant filed a claim petition alleging therein that on 23.1.95 at about 4.30 p.m. he met with a motor road accident, while he was waiting for a bus to go from Barwani to Talun at Bus Stop Anjad Naka, Barwani. While he was standing there a truck bearing registration No. MP-10/5544 came at a high speed and dashed against him. The aforesaid truck, owned by respondent No. 3 and insured with respondent No. 4, was driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1. The appellant sustained injuries in the said accident. He had to spend money on his treatment and he was put to suffer loss of income due to the injuries sustaine...
Harvansh Singh and anr. Vs. Bhagwan Das and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT208; 2006(1)MPLJ604
Manjusha Namjoshi, J.1. Having lost in Trial Court the defendants/appellants have preferred this first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The plaintiffs had filed Civil Suit No. 22-A/1994 Bhagawandas and Anr. v. Harbans Singh and another, in the Court of District Judge, Hoshangabad for specific performance of sale of property under the Specific Relief Act (47 of 1963) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The Trial Court decreed the suit on March 31st, 1999.3. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Trial Court appellants while preferring this appeal stated that the Trial Court did not consider, appreciated and evaluated the evidence and misapplied the law. It was further contended that the Trial Court also failed to appreciate that the time was the essence of the contract for sale of property and the plaintiffs were not ready and willing to perform their part of the contract.4. The plaintiffs/respondents have contested the appeal and supported the judgment and dec...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Associated Food Products P. Ltd. and Po ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(MP)192; [2006]280ITR377(MP)
1. These two appeals were admitted on the following substantial question of law :Whether, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in overturning and unsettling the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the Commissioner had not recorded reasons that there had been prejudice to the interests of the Revenue but solely on the foundation that the Assessing Officer did not have the ample opportunity to proceed with the assessment and there was no sufficient time on the part of the Additional Commissioner to check the order of assessment passed by the original authority ?2. It is pertinent to mention at the very beginning that the only difference in these two appeals is that the assessees are different. Hence, for the sake of clarity and convenience, we shall state the facts in M. A. I. T. No. 52 of 2004.3. The assessee-respondent is a private limited company deriving income from manufacturing of bread and alli...
Seema Vs. Nilesh Chouhan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: AIR2006MP46; II(2006)DMC793
N.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 22-7-2004 passed by First Additional District Judge, Dhar in case No. 36-A/03, whereby decree of divorce has been passed in favour of the respondent, the present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent took place on 9-5-2002 at Dhar. The suit of divorce was filed by the respondent on 28-8-2003. wherein it was alleged that after the solemnization of marriage, appellant went back to her parental house on 18-8-2002. thereafter inspite of calling the appellant did not turn up. It was alleged that respondent went to call the appellant on 23-8-2002. where he was misbehaved, thereafter, on 25-8-2002 along with number of persons, father of the respondent K.C. Chauhan went to the village of the appellant, where he was beaten. 'It was further alleged that on 28-3-2002 a notice was sent by registered post, whereby appellant was called upon but of no effect. Henc...
Jay Prakash Associates Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: (2009)20VST307(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this present batch of writ petitions, the question of law being similar, it is thought appropriate to dispose it of by a singular order and accordingly, a common order is passed. For sake of clarity and convenience, the facts in W.P. No. 2184 of 2004 are dwelt upon herein.2. The petitioner is a public limited company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office at Lucknow (U.P.) and head office at New Delhi. It operates and performs various activities including road building, cement manufacturing, construction of power houses, dam constructions, hotel, etc. The Narmada Valley Development Authority (NVDA), an undertaking of the State Government of Madhya Pradesh issued a tender through Executive Engineer, Narmada Development Division No. 12 for construction of intake structure, pressure shift and power house for Indira Sagar (Narmada Sagar) Project in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The tender of the petitioner was accepted and eventually...
Smt. Vandana Vs. Angad Singh Jadav
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)MPHT199; 2006(1)MPLJ463
ORDERU.C. Maheshwari, J.1. The applicant wife has preferred this petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transferring the case Hindu Marriage Case No. (COS) 80-A/05 instituted by the respondent under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the Court of Ilnd Upper District Judge, Chhindwara to the Court of Multai having competent jurisdiction for its further trial.2. As per averments of the application, the applicant was married with the respondent on 7-3-1988 and also gave birth two daughters and one son out of this wedlock. Since 1996 the applicant was given cruel treatment by the respondent on non- fulfillment of his illegal demand of dowry. She was beaten by him in this period also and by neglecting she was insisted to live with her poor parents at Village Bhuyari Post Sonegaon, Tehsil Multai, District Betul. She had no source of income. Thus, on having been neglected by the respondent, she moved an application under Section 125, Cr.PC for maintenance...
Radheshyam Renwal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(MP)489; [2008]296ITR184(MP)
ORDERW.A. Shah, J.1. This is a revision by the accused-applicant under Section 397/401 of the Cr.PC. The applicant is aggrieved by the judgment dt. 22nd May, 1999 passed by Third Addl. Sessions Judge, Indore, in Crl, Appeal No. 36 of 1993 whereby he maintained the conviction of the applicant under Section 276C and Section 277 of the IT Act sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment of 3 months and fine of Rs. 2,500 and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment of 1 month on each count passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Indore, in Crl. Case No. 88 of 1990 decided on 25th Feb., 1993 with a modification of the sentences to run concurrently.2. Union of India, through ITO, Ward No. 2, Gwalior, filed a complaint against the applicant-accused Radheshyam Renwal for offences punishable under Sections 276C and 277 of the IT Act, 1961. In the complaint it was alleged that the accused was a partner in the firm M/s Narsinghdas Renwal, Sarafa, Lashka...
Rameshwar Prasad Sunderlal and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2005
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(MP)287; [2008]296ITR173(MP)
ORDERAshok Kumar Tiwari, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dt. 31st March, 1999 passed by the 5th Addl. Sessions Judge, Indore in Crl. Appeal No. 81 of 1998 against the conviction of the applicants and the sentence imposed on him by the learned 3rd Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore. .2. Applicant No. 1 Rameshwar Prasad Sunderlal was a partnership firm and applicant Nos. 2 (since dead) and 3 were the partners of the aforesaid firm. The other partners of the firm namely, Balaram and Janabai has expired during the trial. The aforesaid firm was income-tax payer. The IT returns on behalf of the firm had to be filed for the asst. yr. 1980-81 under Section 139(1) of the IT Act on 30th June, 1980, but the return was filed on 29th June, 1981. Thus, the return was filed after 11 months from the due date. According to the Department this delay was caused wilfully. Therefore, the prosecution was launched against the firm and its partners Jai Narayan, Balaram, Jana Bai and Radh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »