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.
Anil Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR441]
N.K. Modi, J.1. Heard finally.2. The case of the petitioner is that; he is a handicapped person, as the petitioner is suffering from paralysis. He was appointed as Section Writer against a vacant post as a daily wage employee with effect from 1.9.1984. Petitioner was considered for regular appointment by the District Selection Committee, Ratiam on 25.7.1987 and was found fit for regular appointment and the case of the petitioner was recommended for regular appointment with a condition of passing the typing examination.3. The contention of learned Counsel for petitioner is that there is a Circular dated 18.3.1975 (Annexure P-6) wherein the Government has clarified that on the post of Lower Division Clerk and Shorthand Steno is concerned, handicapped candidates are exempted from passing the typewriting examination, provided a certificate is being issued by the Civil Surgeon or the Medical Board to the effect that because of deformity in the hand, the candidate is not able to learn the ty...
Lalu Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT71; 2005(3)MPLJ50
A.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellant/accused has filed the jail appeal against the judgment and order dated 26-12-98 in Special Case No. 8/98 by Special Judge NDPS Act, Ratlam of his conviction and sentence under Section 8/21 Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act (in short 'NDPS Act') for sentence of 15 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for the period of 2 years.2. The prosecution case is that on 14-4-98 at about 9 PM the secret information was received by the Sub-Inspector Bajranglal of CBN and after forwarding the secret information to the higher authority, the Sub-Inspector alongwith the party reached to the Railway Station, Ratlam and the accused was found sitting in the waiting hall and after informing about the secret information, from the bag of the accused the Heroin weighing 1.750 gm was seized vide Ex. P-4 and after extracting the sample from the Heroin the sample packet alongwith the seized...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Doongaji and Co. Distillery
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: (2005)196CTR(MP)574; [2005]276ITR402(MP); 2005(3)MPLJ234
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an income-tax reference made under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) in R. A. Nos. 148 to 151/Ind of 1992 arising out of an order dated August 6, 1996, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. Nos. 730 and 731/Ind of 1987 and 316/7/ Ind of 1988 to answer the following questions of law said to arise out of the appellate order referred supra.'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claim of retrenchment compensation though there was no retrenchment of workers or closure of business ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the bottles used in liquor business as plant ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the assessee as owner of the bottles used in its business though the ult...
Sanjay R. Trivedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)MPHT57
Dipak Misra, J.1. In this revision preferred under Section 19 of the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (for brevity 'the Act'), the applicant has called in question the sustainability of the award dated 28-10-2004 passed by M.P. Arbtiration Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal') in Reference Case No. 35/2002 whereby the Tribunal has held that the two claims putforth by the petitioner were barred by limitation and further the same were not tenable on merits also.2. The facts which are essential to be stated are that the petitioner/revisionist as claimant was awarded a contract No. 7/DL of the. year 1991-92 in respect of the work VRB (Village Road Bridge) at R.D. 2005 meters of right bank canal of Bargi Dam. As per the claimant, he completed 82% of the contract work in about nine months. He applied for grant of extension on 2-12-1992 for a period of three months which was granted by the Executive Engineer but he could not utilize the same as there was non- supply of requisite quanti...
B.D. Pathak Vs. M.P.S.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)MPHT302
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. Petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs. 500/-. As per order (P-6), dated 24-8-1998 services of the petitioner were dispensed with without any further enquiry and giving opportunity of defence. The question which is agitated by the petitioner that opportunity of hearing and notice ought to have been given. Enquiry should have been conducted.2. The above question stands answered against the petition by the Full Bench of this Court in Laxmi Narayan Hayaran v. State of M.P. and one Anr., 2004 (4) M.P.H.T. 343 : 2005(1) MPJR 55, wherein the Full Bench presided by Hon'ble the Chief Justice laid down that in such cases of conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, even though the sentence of imprisonment has been suspended, no enquiry is necessary to be conducted as conviction is for corruption case...
Smt. Pramila Bakore Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: (2006)204CTR(MP)307; [2006]281ITR46(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an income-tax reference made at the instance of the assessee by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in R.A. No. 108/Ind/91 which arises out of an appellate order dated May 5, 1991, passed by the Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 701/Ind/85 to answer the following question of law :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the deduction under Section 80TT is admissible on the net amount of prize money of Rs. 10,80,000 and not on the gross lottery prize of Rs. 12 lakhs as per the provisions of Section 80TT read with Section 80B(5) of the Income-tax Act which were in force in the assessment year 1978-79 ?2. The late M. P. Bakore was the husband of the assessee. He won the first prize of lottery of M. P. State of Rs. 12 lakhs. This amount was then assessed to tax in the hands of the assessee's husband and on his death in the hands of the assessee as his legal representative.3. In ter...
Dr. Ku. Kruti Vs. Mannalal Pannalal Construction Pvt. Ltd. and 2 ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: II(2005)ACC122; 2005(2)MPLJ124
ORDERA.K. Awasthy, J.1. The appellant/claimant has filed the appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the enhancement of the amount of award dated 28th February, 2001 in Claim Case No. 44/2000 passed by learned Additional Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ujjain, whereby the amount of Rs. 7,000/-along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of presentation of application i.e., 17.11.1997 was provided to the appellant.2. The case of the claim is that on 8.7.1996 at about 2.00 p.m. when the claimant was going in her Luna then near Church Colony, Indore, respondent No. 2 Rajendra Singhal, while driving Maruti Car rashly and negligently, has hit the Luna and in the accident the nasal bone of the claimant was fractured and she has also received the injuries on other parts of her body. That the claimant is a doctor and she was admitted for 45 days in the hospital. That respondent No. 1 is the owner and respondent No. 3 is insurer and as such the amount of Rs. 1,08,0...
Damyantibai and ors. Vs. Mahesh Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: II(2005)ACC332; 2005(3)MPLJ1
ORDERA.K. Awasthy, J.1. The appellant/claimants have filed the appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the increase of the amount of award dated 13.12.2000 in Claim Case No. 184/1998 passed by learned Fourth Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore, wherein the amount of Rs. 85,000/- was provided of the vehicular death along with interest @ 12% p.a. from 14.11.1998.2. The case of the claimants is that on 22.6.1998 when Basantilal was coming to Indore from Sanwer on the Hero Honda bearing registration number MP-09/ JC-2378 at about 1.00 a.m. near village Laxmankhedi, respondent No. 2 while driving his motorcycle rashly and negligently fell in the pit and Basantilal died on account of the injury received by him in the accident. That the report was lodged in Police Station Sanwer and the case was registered under Section 304A of the I.P.C. against respondent No. 2. That respondent No. 1 was the owner of the vehicle and respondent No. 3 was its insurer. That th...
Khem Chand Gegle Vs. M.P. State Road Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR965]
Arun Mishra, J.1. In this writ petition petitioner is assailing an Order (P-1) passed by Industrial Court by which Industrial Court has reversed the order passed by Labour Court Labour Court has directed reinstatement without backwages of petitioner who held the post of conductor.Petitioner held the post of Conductor in MPSRTC, he was found carrying 21 passengers without ticket, departmental enquiry was held, pursuant to departmental enquiry his services were terminated as per Order dated 24.12.1986, order of termination of services was assailed by petitioner by way of filing an application under Section 31 read with Section 61 of MPIR Act. The Labour Court declared the enquiry to be illegal as per Order dated 7.8.1987, thereafter evidence was adduced by both parties. On consideration of evidence. Labour Court directed reinstatement without backwages. MPSRTC preferred an appeal against the order passed by Labour Court, appeal has been decided as per Order (P.I) dated 23.4.1998, appeal ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bright Automotive and Plastics Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: [2006]280ITR157(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against an order dated September 25, 2001, passed in the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 627/Ind of 1996. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of law :1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that expenditure made on account of royalty payment was allowable as revenue expenditure ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing expenditure of Rs. 10,39,045 treated by the Assessing Officer as unreasonable and not deductible as per the provisions of Section 40A(2) and Section 35A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. None for the appellant. Heard Shri G.M. Chafekar, learned senior counsel with Shri D.S. Kale, learned Counsel, for t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »