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.
Tirupati Steel Industries Ltd. Vs. Cestat
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(199)ELT793(MP)
1. Appellant begs to submit;(1) That, the Appellant M/s. Tirupati Steel Industries, Garra, Distt. Balaghat (MP) is engaged in the manufacture of rerollable material of Iron and Steel of Chapter 72 of CETA, 1985.(2) That, being a Small Scale Industry unit the appellant also avails the benefit of exemption and Slab concession vide Exemption Notification No. 1/93 C.E., dt. 28-2-1993 as amended.2. Mr. U.S. Bhatt and Mr. P.K. Tiwari, Advocates for the appellant.3. Mr. Brian Da'Silva, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Sajid Akhtar, Advocate for the Respondent.4. We have satisfied that the following substantial questions of law arise for determination in this appeal:(i) 'Whether the goods manufactured on job-work basis by the appellant are branded goods of SAIL for the purpose of para 4 and explanations (iii) and (ix) of Exemption Notification No. 1/93-C.E.?(ii) Whether the value of clearance of SAIL's branded goods is to be taken into account for the purpose of computing aggregate value of cl...
Radheshyam Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(MP)498; [2006]152TAXMAN207(MP)
ORDER1. This is a revision by the accused applicant under section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant is aggrieved by the judgment dated 22-5-1999 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Indore, in Criminal Appeal No. 36/1993 whereby he maintained the conviction of the applicant under section 276C and section 277 of the Income Tax 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 SI of I month on each count passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offenccs), Indore, in Criminal Case No. 88/1990 decided on 25-2-1993 with a modification of the sentences to run concurrently.2. Union of India through Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 2, Gwalior, filed a complaint against the applicant accused Radheshyam Renwal for offences punishable under sections 276C and 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the complaint it was alleged that the accused was a partner in the firm M/s. Narsi...
Sunder Lal Soni Vs. Smt. Namita Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: AIR2006MP51
1. In this appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1983, the non-applicant/appellant has called in question the defensibility of the judgment dated 21st day of September 2004 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 85-A of 2001 (new No. 179-A of 2002).2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts which are essential to be stated are that the applicant/respondent wife filed an application under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short the Act) for annulment of her marriage performed with the non-applicant/appellant/husband and to pass a decree of nullity. It was pleaded in the application that she was a student of Post Graduation course and the appellant husband is a Vaidya and also engaged in astrology. The mother of the respondent wife was a patient of high blood pressure and her father a diabetic for many a year. Her parents used to have the treatment from the appellant husband who was practicing both Ayurvedic and Homoeopathic medici...
Ram Singh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1372; 2005(3)MPLJ458
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 30-12-99 passed by the Court below forfeiting the bail bonds of the surety and directing the appellants to deposit the amount of surety, the appellants have filed this criminal appeal under Section 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. Sans unnecessary details, the facts lie in narrow compass. One Dheer Singh was the surety of accused-Ram Singh. On 25-9-99 the accused who was on bail, did not appear in the Court and as such the bail bonds were forfeited. The Court found that the surety had died on 31-7-98. However, by the impugned order, the Court below has directed the appellants, who are the heirs of the surety, to deposit the surety amount of Rs. 30,000/- (Rs.Thirty thousand). Hence this appeal.3. Shri Mayank Vajpayee, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants by inviting my attention to Sub-section (4) of Section 446 of Cr.P.C. has submitted that in case the surety dies before the bond is forfeited, his estate ...
Bhadriya and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4756
S.L. Kochar, J.1. For taking exception to the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed against them by learned II Addl. Sessions Judge, Alirajpur in the matter of Sessions Trial No. 421/2002, the appellants have approached this Court by preferring this appeal. Learned II Addl. Sessions Judge had convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 307, 307/34 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo RI for seven years each and fine of Rs. 300/- each in default of the fine, they shall undergo imprisonment for one month.2. The prosecution case in short is that on 19-7-2002 in the evening complainant Dhulia (PW. 1) was returning back from the house of his relation named Kunwarsingh from village Moriavada after taking meals on celebration of festival 'Divasa' (shraad of the forefathers of Kunwarsingh, in tribal community of Jhabua District, they are arranging this function on the day of dark moon one day prior or after). On the way Dhulia met appellants near the ho...
F.A. Construction Vs. Narmada Valley Development Department and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)MPHT216
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions the centripodal issue being same and the question of law that emerges for consideration being similar it was heard analogously and is disposed of by this singular order. For the sake of clarity and convenience the facts in W.P. No. 1063/2005 are adumbrated herein.2. The petitioner, a registered partnership firm, is engaged in doing the job of civil and irrigation works. It entered into an agreement with the Narmada Valley Development Authority (presently known as Narmada Valley Development Department) vide agreement No. 2/DL/2002-2003 for construction of right bank main canal, Group-1. RD 16 KM to RD 20 KM. After acceptance of the tender, as pleaded, work order was issued in favour of the petitioner and thereafter, the petitioner approached the respondents for providing mark-out and handing over the site for commencement of the work but due to non-response of the respondents the petitioner was compelled to file an application under...
Vandana and ors. Vs. Madanlal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC448
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Heard on IA No. 8362/2005, which is an application for condonation of delay. Delay is of one day. Sufficient ground is made out for condoning the delay. Hence, application is allowed.2. With the consent of parties, heard on merits.3. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the amount awarded vide award dated 30.4.2005 passed by IIIrd MACT, Ratlam in Claim Case No. 44/2004, whereby a sum of Rs. 3,07,000 has been awarded along with interest @ 6% per annum, the present appeal has been filed.4. Learned Counsel for the appellants submit that the deceased was aged 29 years at the time of accident. Breakup of the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is as under:Towards loss of dependency : Rs. 2,99,200Towards transport charges : Rs. 15,000Towards loss of consortium : Rs. 5,000Towards funeral expenses : Rs. 2,0005. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that while calculating loss of dependency, the learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 17, while looking to the...
Kiran Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT344
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The factual matrix and controversy involved, the points urged and further on the basis of concession given, both he writ petitions were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order. It is condign to state here that though the presentableness of different orders have been called in question by the petitioners by assailing them on different spectrums, for the sake of proper adjudication, the facts which are essentially to be stated encapsuling the essence in singular compartment, are adumbrated herein. Be it placed on record though the assail is to the orders passed by the Civil Court, the learned Counsel appearing for the parties have conceded for delineation of the controversy by this Court which would put an end to the cavil that has arisen in the civil suit.2. The facts which are necessitous for the disposal of the writ petitions are that the State of M.P. formulated a scheme regarding supply of afternoon meal to the school children. To give effec...
Ganbai and ors. Vs. Ganpat and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC129
Ashok Kumar Tiwari, J.1. This appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, has been filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the sum awarded to them vide award dated 3.2.2001, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kukshi District Dhar (M.P.) in Claim Case No. 20/99.2. On 5.1.1999 deceased Bondarsingh was driving the tractor bearing Registration No. MP-11/5088, owned by respondent No. 1 Ganpat. The said tractor was insured with respondent No. 2, at the relevant point of time. Deceased Bondarsingh was driving the aforesaid tractor under the employment of respondent No. 1 when at about 1. a.m. the tractor turned over a valley. Deceased Bondarsingh received injuries in the accident and succumbed to the same. His legal representatives and dependents preferred a claim demanding Rs. 4,25,000 as compensation for the loss caused to them due to the death of the deceased. The learned Tribunal by the impugned award allowed the claim of the claimants in part ...
Ram Dayal and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-2005
Reported in: AIR2006MP172; 2006(1)MPLJ306
U.C. Maheshwari, J. 1. Appellants/plaintiffs have filed this appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 7-12-1996, passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Sidhi in Civil Regular Appeal No. 55-A/1995, whereby the judgment and decree dated 12-3-1968 regarding of suit passed by Civil Judge Class-II, Baidhan in Civil Suit No. 11-A/1980 has been upheld.2. As per factual matrix of the case the appellants had filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the respondents in respect of Revenue land bearing Survey Nos. 348, 349/3 and 354 total area 19.50 acres situated at village Madhauli Tahsil Singrauli District Sidhi M.P. According to the appellants, they had possession of the said land since last 40 years, earlier as 'Gair Hakdar Kashtkar'; and on coming into force the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') they have acquired the right of Bhumiswami. It is also pleaded that some P...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »