Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
Bonanza Biotech Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-2005
Reported in: [2005]126CompCas80(MP); [2005]62SCL84(MP)
A.M. Sapre J.1. The decision rendered in this writ shall also govern disposal of W. P. No. 673 of 2004 as both these writs involve identical points.2. By filing this writ under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the issuance of show cause notice dated November 18, 2003 (annexure P3), issued by the Investigating Officer under Section 11C(1)(6), read with Section 15A and Section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992.3. The impugned show cause notice (annexure P3) is challenged by the petitioner only on the ground that firstly, there is no order in writing passed by the Board appointing any person as contemplated under Section 11(1) of the Act to investigate the affairs of the petitioner-company and secondly, even if there exists any order as contemplated under Section 11C(1) ibid then it is the legal obligation on the part of the issuing authority (respondent) to give its copy to the petitioner before giving effect to the ...
D.M. Woollen Mills (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Department
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-2005
Reported in: [2006]129CompCas587(MP); [2005]62SCL135(MP); [2006]144STC253(MP)
ORDERS.K. Seth, J.1. Whether Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 or Section 22 of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as '1985 Act' for short) bars assessment of tax or bars recovery of tax. This is the short question involved in the present writ petition and arises in the backdrop of following facts which are undisputed.2. Petitioner No. 1 herein is Private Limited Company engaged in manufacture of yarn. It is also registered as a dealer under the M.P. Vanijya Kar Adhiniyam, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as '1994 Act' for short); Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as '1956 Act' for short); and MP Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 ('Entry Tax Act' for short). For the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96, petitioner No. 1's turnover was assessed to tax under 1956 Act and Entry Tax Act and demand was raised. For the assessment year 1996-97, tax was assessed and demand was raised under 1994 Act. St...
Kanhaiyalal Vs. Ved Prakash and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ1741
S.K. Gangele, J.1. Appellant-claimant has filed the present appeal against the award dated 31.1.2001, passed in Claim Case No. 75 of 1998.2. That appellant was travelling in a Tempo Trax from Dewas to Shajapur and he was dashed by a truck No. MP 07-1602 at village Maksi due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of truck and report of incident was lodged at Police Station, Maksi. A criminal case was also registered against the driver.3. Appellant filed an application for compensation before the Tribunal pleading that he was aged 50 years and working as labourer, he was earning Rs. 1,500 per month. He received injuries on his ribs, shoulder, left leg and ankle, there was permanent disability to him. He was admitted in District Hospital, Ujjain from 6.10.1997 to 14.10.1997.4. Dr. N.K. Gupta deposed before the Tribunal that he examined the appellant and issued a permanent disability certificate, there was a fracture in scapula of right shoulder and right collarbone and also fracture ...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mahendra Kumar JaIn and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ1053
S.S. Jha, J.1. Misc. Appeal Nos. 400, 401, 402, 403 and 404 of 1996 are filed by the insurance company and Misc. Appeal Nos. 426 of 1996 and 35 of 1997 are filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation. In Misc. Appeal No. 402 of 1996 cross-objection for enhancement of compensation is filed by the claimants. Since all the appeals arise out of common award, therefore, these appeals are disposed of by a common judgment.Misc. Appeal Nos. 400, 401, 402, 403 and 404 of 1996:2. In these appeals, insurance company has submitted that this is a case of composite negligence, therefore, the owner, driver and insurance company of bus in which the claimants were travelling were necessary party to the petition and there should be apportionment of compensation between the owner, driver and insurance company of both the vehicles. In Misc. Appeal No. 403 of 1996 insurance company has also impleaded owner of the bus as well as truck.3. Facts of the case are that on 12.6.1993 claimants were trav...
Hajarilal and ors. Vs. Lakhanpratap and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2005
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC548; 2006ACJ1019; 2005(3)MPLJ17
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of all the three connected appeals, out of which Misc. Appeal No. 196 of 1998 has been filed against dismissal of the claim petition and Misc. Appeal No. 263 of 1998 has been filed for enhancement of compensation by the claimants and Misc. Appeal No. 304 of 1998 has been filed by the owners of the vehicle.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 26.6.1995 a truck bearing registration No. MP 07-A 7032 owned by Gurudeep Singh, respondent No. 2, was being driven by Lakhanpratap Singh, respondent No. 1. The said truck was insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 3, (hereinafter referred to as 'the insurance company'). The case of the claimants was that deceased Mendabai and Doltibai along with Bhagti, Luma, Jenwati and Gopi were sitting near cement factory of Bhangarh and they were waiting for the bus to go to the place of worship. At the same time the aforesaid truck which was driven rashly and negligently came and tu...
Rajesh Vs. M.P.S.R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2005
Reported in: II(2005)ACC638
S.K. Gangele, J.1. Appellant/claimant has filed the present appeal against the award dated 24.2.2001, passed in Claim Case No. 249/2000.2. That the appellant was coming from Ujjain to Indore on 29.5.1997 at around 10.30 in the night of his scooter along with one Kamlesh. A bus of respondent No. 1 dashed him; he received serious injuries in his right hand and admitted in Ujjain Hospital.3. That, the appellant filed claim application before the Tribunal mentioning that his right hand was damaged badly in the accident. There was plastic surgery on his right hand and due the loss of muscles movement of his fingers were affected, he was working in Government Printing Press and earning Rs. 3,043/- per month. The accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of driver of the bus.4. The respondent denied the claim of appellant.5. The Tribunal held that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus and respondent No. 1 and driver are responsible for ...
Durgaprasad Vs. Kallaram and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: AIR2005MP224; 2005(2)MPHT351; 2005(2)MPLJ545
P.K. Jaiswal, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the defendant No. 1/mortgagee against the judgment and decree dated 19-7-2001 passed by Additional District Judge, Sheopurkalan in Civil Appeal No. 12-A/99, whereby learned Additional District Judge affirmed the judgment and decree of the Trial Court dated 24-12-1998 passed by Second Civil Judge Class II, Sheopurkalan and dismissed the appeal of the mortgagee.2. The facts of the case are that Kapoorchand (hereinafter referred to as 'mortgagor') (since deceased) mortgaged suit house vide registered mortgaged deed dated 13-10-1983 in favour of Durga Prasad-appellant/defendant No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'mortgagee'). There was a stipulation in the mortgage deed that if mortgage amount was not returned to the mortgagee within the period stipulated then the mortgagee will be within his right to get the sale deed executed and the mortgage deed would be treated 'an agreement to sale'. The house was mortgaged for Rs. 10,000/- and Kapoorch...
Rajendra Chaturvedi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2369; 2005(3)MPHT379
ORDERAjit Singh, J.1. This revision is against the order dated 12-7-1995 passed in Sessions Trial No. 43/1993 by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa, whereby he has directed for arraigning the applicant as an accused for an offence under Section 366/109 of the Indian Penal Code by virtue of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').2. The husband of complainant Saraswati (PW-1) was posted as Constable in the Ninth Battalion, Special Armed Force (SAF) Rewa. At the relevant time Saraswati (PW-1) was staying at Rewa with him. The applicant was commandant of that Battalion and he was staying at Gulab Club, Rewa. On 29-8-1986 Saraswati (PW-1) lodged a written complaint with the applicant that on the previous night of 28-8-1986 at about 10.00 p.m. Constables Albert Fasana and Ashok Kumar had entered her house and committed robbery at gun point. They then dragged her to the room of applicant and pushed her inside the room. On seeing this, the applicant asked ...
Shri Mahila Grih Udyog Lijjat Papad Vs. Smt. Pushpa Berry and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT49; 2005(3)MPLJ227
ORDERAjit Singh, J. 1. This revision, by the defendant/applicant is directed against the order dated 11-12-2003 passed in Civil Suit No. 2-A/2003 by the VIIIth Civil Judge, Class II, Jabalpur, whereby its application under Section 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been dismissed.2. The defendant/applicant is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. It is also registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The object of the Society, according to its memorandum of association, is to promote various social, economic, educational, cultural activities or any profitable field of activity and activities like giving scholarship, medical aid, etc. to needy persons. To achieve this object, the defendant/applicant undertook the activity of making papad for which it engaged women who were willing to abide by its object. Any woman could become the member of the defendant/applicant by working with it. The defendant/applicant has many branches...
Magadh Enterprises Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: 2005(185)ELT113(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a petition filed under Artice 227 of the Constitution of India by the appellant of Appeal bearing No. E/893/90-B which was dismissed by CEGAT on 23-7-99 by their final order bearing No. 753/99-B. By this petition, the petitioner challenges an order dated 17-10-2001 (Annexure P/1) passed by the CEGAT on an application made by the appellant refusing to restore the appeal which came to be dismissed in default on 23-7-99 by CEGAT.2. By means of this petition, the only grievance of the appellant i.e. petitioner herein is that their appeal ought not to have been dismissed in default on 23-7-99 and even if dismissed, the same ought to have been restored by allowing their application made by them for restoration of the appeal. It is this grievance which is reiterated by the petitioner in this writ petition which did not find favour to the CEGAT when the application for restoration of appeal was dismissed by impugned order dated 17-10-2001 (Annexure P/1).3. It is r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »