Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Dukhkhu Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT46; 2005(3)MPLJ193
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. Petitioner has sought following reliefs :--(1) 'The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the entire relevant record pertaining to the subject-matter for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.(2) The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order and direction commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner for holding the office of Sarpanch for a period of 5 years from the date of joining after the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court.(3) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be passed together cost of the petition.'Facts of the case are that the petitioner contested the election of the post of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Harrabhat, Tehsil Baihar, District Balaghat held in the year 1999-2000. In the said election one Rai Singh was declared elected as Sarpanch. The petitioner challenged his election by filing election petition. The election petition of the petitioner attained finality by order dated 23-4-2004 by...
Rami and ors. Vs. Rahul Trading and Finance Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT193; 2005(2)MPLJ135
ORDERA.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellant Rami has filed M.A. No. 933 of 2000, appellant Chesta has filed M.A. No. 932 of 2000 and appellant Satyadeo has filed M.A. No. 931 of 2000, for enhancement of the Award dated 28-4- 2000 in Claim Case No. 119 of 96, 127 of 96 and 130 of 96, respectively arising of the same incident, passed by learned Second MACT, Shajapur, wherein compensation of Rs. 27,000/- is provided in Claim Case No. 119 of 96, compensation of Rs. 5500/- is provided in Claim Case No. 130 of 96 and compensation of Rs. 4500/- is provided in Claim Case No. 127 of 96.2. The claim of the claimants is that on 21 -1 -91 when claimants and the deceased Ku. Pooja Sharma were travelling in a Mini Bus W.P. No. 09-B-3962 from Indore to Ramganj Mandi, the bus turned turtle on account of the rash and negligent driving by the driver and in the accident Ku. Pooja Sharma, aged 12 years, who was studying in 7th Class has died. The claimants and Chesta have also received injuries. The bus was owned b...
Sunita Sharma and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC272; 2005(3)MPLJ484
ORDERU.C. Maheshwari, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 30.10.2004 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Umaria in S.T. No. 117/2004, whereby the direction for framing charges against the applicants under Sections 498/34, 304B and in alternative 306 of I.P.C. has been given and the same have been framed.2. The prosecution case in brief is that the deceased Mamta was married with applicant No. 2 Rakesh @ Gudda Sahrma before four years from the date of incident i.e., 14.7.2002. On this day deceased Mamta poured kerosene on herself and ablazed, immediately she was shifted to the Public Health Centre, Chandia and from where she was referred to Medical College, Jabalpur, during the treatment she succumbed to death due to burn injuries. As per procedure initially preliminary inquiry was held and on the basis of such inquiry Crime No. 166/02 was registered by Police Chandia on dated 3.10.2002 for offence under Sections 304B, 306/34 of I.P.C. against the ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Motlay Finance (P) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)332; [2007]290ITR719(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by Revenue (CIT) under Section 260A of the IT Act against an order dt. 29th June, 2004 passed by Tribunal in ITA No. 569/Ind/1999.2. The 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 IT Act for admission of appeal.3. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the appellant.4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and having perused record of the case, we are of the view that the appeal has no substance. In other words, the appeal does not involve any substantial question of law as is required to be made out under Section 260A of the Act and hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed in limine.5. The question arose in the assessment proceedings of the assessee about the nature of income derived by making investment in shares/debentures. The AO held it to be an income from o...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(MP)363
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an income-tax reference made at the instance of assessee under Section 256(1) of the IT Act by the Tribunal by an order passed in RA No. 83/85/Ind/1997, dt. 13th Nov., 1999 which in turn arise out of an order passed by Tribunal on 23rd May, 1997 in Interest-tax Appeal Nos. 1 and 2/Ind/1991 to answer following question of law is said to arise out of the aforesaid appellate order :Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, Tribunal was justified in holding that the order of assessment under Section 8(2) of the Interest-tax Act, 1974, dt. 6th Jan., 1989, is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and the CIT has properly exercised his jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Interest-tax Act, 1974 ?2. Heard Shri R.T. Thanevala, learned Counsel for the applicant/assessee, and Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned Counsel for the non-applicant/Revenue.3. In short, the question that arises for considerati...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: [2006]283ITR361(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an income-tax reference made at the instance of the assessee under Sections 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Tribunal by an order passed in R.A. No. 83/85/Ind/97, dated November 13, 1999, which in turn arise out of an order passed by the Tribunal on May 23, 1997, in Interest-tax Appeals Nos. 1 and 2/Ind/91 to answer the following question of law said to arise out of the aforesaid appellate order :Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the order of assessment under Sections 8(2) of the Interest-tax Act 1974, dated January 6, 1989, is erroneous and prejudicial, to the interests of the Revenue and the Commissioner of Income tax has properly exercised his jurisdiction under Sections 19 of the Interest-tax Act 1974?2. Heard Shri R.T. Thanevala, learned Counsel for the applicant/assessee, and Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned Counsel for the n...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Cit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: [2006]283ITR363(MP)
This is an Income-tax Reference made at the instance of assessee under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act by the Tribunal by an order passed in R.A. No. 83/85/lnd/97, dated 13-11-1999 which in turn arise out of an order passed by Tribunal on 23-5-1997 in Interest tax Appeal, No. 1 and 2/Ind/91 to answer following question of law said to arise out of the aforesaid appellate order'Whether on the facts. and the circumstances of the case, Income tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the order of assessment under section 8(2)- of the Interest tax Act 1974 dated 6-1-1989 is erroneous and prejudicial, to the interests of the revenue and the Commissioner of Income tax has properly exercised his jurisdiction under section 19 of the Interest tax Act 1974.2. Heard Shri R.T. Thanevala, learned counsel for the applicant/assessee and Shri RL Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the non-applicant/Revenue.3. In short, the question that arises for consi...
Smt. Asha Batham Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2005
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR334]
N.K. Mody, J.1. Present petition has been filed by the widow, whose husband was working in Education department with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay the gratuity amount and amount of GIS along with interest2. Short facts of the case are that husband of the petitioner was posted as Headmaster and died on 5.3.2002, while in service. The husband of the petitioner was occupying the Government quarter. All the dues were paid to the petitioner and the petitioner was allowed to occupy the Government accommodation till 1.6.2004. So far as amount of gratuity is concerned, vide Annexure-P-1, it was found that the petitioner is entitled for, a sum of Rs. 1,94,387, but it was further observed that petitioner will be entitled for amount of gratuity only after vacating the Government quarter.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents are charging the penal rent at the rate of Rs. 4000/- per month with effect from 1.7.2004. Further submission of the learned Counsel f...
State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Shri P.D. Goyal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT286
ORDERU.C. Maheshwari, J.1. This revision petition is preferred under Section 19 of Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 by the applicants against the award dated 20-6-1994 passed by the Madhya Pradesh Arbitration Tribunal, Bhopal in Reference Case No. 76 of 1992, whereby the claim/reference of the non-applicant was partly allowed and the applicant was directed to release the F.D.R. amounting Rs. 2,58,305/- including interest thereon to the non- applicant. Beside this the cost of the reference and the Counsel fee are also awarded.2. Brief facts of the case are that the non-applicant's tender was accepted by the applicants and the work of construction of approach road to high level bridge in Km. 397/4 of National Highway No. 26 (Kurmundu Nala) including construction of five number Hume Pipe was given by the agreement No. 23/DL 87-88. In this regard work order was issued on 19-10-1987 and initially probable amount of contract was 16.35 lacs and was to be completed within e...
Gulab Jharia Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT366
S.K. Pande, J.1. ASJ, Jabalpur in S.T.No. 152/2003 vide impugned judgment dated 30-4-2004, recording conviction of appellants under Section 376(2)(g), IPC sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years and to pay fine Rs. 3,000/-, in default to suffer further imprisonment for a period of three months. Being aggrieved, appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 374(2), Cr.PC.2. Prosecutrix aged about 25 years on 10-11-2002, at 4.35 P.M. lodged the report (Ex. P-1) at Police Station, Kundam, to the effect that on 4-11-2002, at about 8 P.M., on way back to her house, she was apprehended by appellants Gulab Jharia, Ashwani Kumar and one Tejilal. All the three have taken her to the deserted house of Munnulal Choudhary. Tejilal remained at the outer door of the house. Inside of the room, appellants Gulab and Ashwani forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her. After the incident, all the three rushed away from the place of incident and she narrated the story to her husba...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »