Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
Sangeeta Kalanki and ors. Vs. Abdul Latif and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-2005
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC314
ORDER1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 28.1.2004 passed by 3rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ujjain in Motor Vehicle Case No. 48 of 2003, whereby the Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition of the appellants, for the reasons assigned by him in the impugned Award.2. The facts giving rise to the filing of the present appeal are as under: According to appellants on 21.5.2001, deceased Sudhkar was going on Luna bearing registration No. MP-13/FA-6893 at Ujjain. At that time P.W. 2 Jagdish, was also a pillion rider on the said Luna, which was being driven by deceased Sudhakar. At that point of time, according to the appellants, the Luna was dashed by a scooter, driven by respondent No. 1 Abdul Latif, owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3. Due to the said accident and the injuries sustained by Sudhakar he succumbed to the same.3. FIR is said to have been lodged by Jagdish, co-...
National Textile Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2005
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(MP)374; [2006]286ITR496(MP); 2005(2)MPHT371; 2005(3)MPLJ310
ORDER1. This is an application made under Section 256(2) of Income-tax Act by the assessee consequent upon the dismissal of their application made under' Section 256(1) of the Act by the Tribunal (I.T.A.T.) by order dated 12-5-97 passed in R.A. No. 11/IND/97 which in turn arises out of an appellate order dated 27-12-1996 passed in I.T.A. No. 778/IND/92. It is the case of applicant that Tribunal ought not have dismissed their application made under Section 256(1) of the Act for making a reference to this Court on the questions proposed but should have allowed the same by making the reference under Section 256(1) ibid. According to applicant, the questions proposed are referable questions and being questions of law arising out of the aforesaid appellate order, the same need to be decided by this Court in its reference jurisdiction conferred by Section 256(1) of the Act.2. The applicant has proposed following three questions of law which according to applicant do arise out of the aforemen...
Kaliya and Etc. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4690
S.L. Kochar, J.1. All the aforesaid three appeals arise out of a common judgment delivered in one Sessions Trial, therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment.2. Being dissatisfied by the judgment dated 16-2-1999 delivered in Sessions Trial No. 492/97 by the learned third Addl. Sessions Judge, Alirajpur thereby finding the appellants guilty of the offences punishable under Section 302/34, sentenced them each to suffer imprisonment for life, the appellants have preferred the aforesaid three appeals separately.3. Briefly stated, the facts of the prosecution case as unfolded before the trial Court were that on 26-7-1997 at 3.30 p.m. in village Juwania forest, the complainant P.W. 1 Bhadu, deceased-Jaimalsingh s/o Bhadu and P.W. 2 Sardarsingh s/o Bhadu were ploughing the forest land admeasuring about 5 acres. At that juncture, the appellants reached over there. Appellant-Chhataria asked the complainant P.W. 1 Bhadu not to plough the said field because they had already ploughed...
M.P. State Electricity Board Vs. Pandey Construction Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)MPHT206; 2005(2)MPLJ550
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In C.R. No. 1330/2003 question has been referred for consideration of Larger Bench as to applicability of Section 5 of Limitation Act to a revision preferred under Section 19 of M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1983') beyond period of limitation in the High Court. Revision is barred by limitation. Application has been filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the revision. Correctness of the decision of Division Bench in Nagarpalika Parishad, Morena v. Agrawal Construction Co., 2004(II) MPJR SN 55 taking the view that in the absence of provision in Act of 1983 delay can not be condoned under Section 5 of Limitation Act has been referred for consideration of Larger Bench on 7-5-2004 in the light of decision rendered by the Apex Court in Mukri Gopalan v. Cheppilat Puthanpurayil Aboobacker, (1995) 5 SCC 5 = AIR 1995 SC 2272. In C.R. No. 633/2003, C.R. No. 1000/2003 and C.R. No. 151/2004, similar question has been ...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Kalpana Dal Mills and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(MP)402; [2008]296ITR639(MP); 2005(2)MPHT284
A.K. Awasthy, J. 1. The appellant/complainant had filed the appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.PC for setting aside the acquittal in complaint under Section 276E/278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide judgment and order dated 23-8-1993 by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore in Criminal Case No. 5/90.2. The case of the complainant is that Shri N.K. Vijayvargiya was posted as Income Tax Officer of Ward No. 2 (5) at Indore and he was the public servant and he has filed the complaint after taking the sanction under Section 279 of the Income Tax Act on 22-1-1990. That accused No. 1 M/s. Kalpana Dal Mill was registered partnership firm and accused Nos. 2 to 5 are the partners of the firm and they were responsible to the firm and incharge of conducting the business of the firm. That firm M/s. Kalpana Dal Mill has given the amount of Rs. 30,()00/- in cash on 26-11-83 to Surendra Kumar and Tarun Kumar Modi. That on 9-12-83 the amount of Rs. 31,000/- that on 11-11-83 amount of Rs. 37,000...
Sameena Khan Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT369
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The centroidal issue that has emerged for adjudication in this writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is whether a candidate at the time of interview conducted by the M.P. Public Service Commission [in short 'the Commission'] would offer preference in respect of certain posts and thereafter being not selected for those posts can put forth or advance a claim that she should have been considered for other posts despite the factum the Rule, the advertisement and the form unequivocally postulate that if a candidate has not given any preference in respect of the posts, he or she would not be considered for the said post ?2. The facts that are requisite to be adumbrated are that an advertisement was published by M.P. Public Service Commission (in short 'the Commission') in Rozgar and Nirman dated 9-4-1998 bearing advertisement No. 0298 for filling of 423 posts of various categories of posts in the State Government. As put forth in the pe...
Rajesh Makhija Vs. Smt. Mamta Alias Shalu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2005
Reported in: AIR2006MP23; 2005(3)MPHT470; 2005(3)MPLJ564
Subhash Samvatsar, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the husband - defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated 15th February, 2004 passed by Third Additional District Judge, Morena, in Civil Suit NO. 39-A/2002, whereby the Court below has allowed an application filed by the respondent - wife under Section 13(I) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and granted divorce on the ground of cruelty.2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent - wife filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act alleging that she married with the defendant 8-11-97 at Morena as per the Hindu rites. According to her the engagement ceremony was held a: Morena in February, 1997 and a number of articles were given by her parents to the defendant at that time. After marriage she went to Aligarh with her husband on 9-11-97 and resided with him for nearly one month. She found that her husband was habitual of drinking and when she tried to stop him from drinking he started her harassing and assau...
Ajay Kumar Vs. Divisional Forest Officer-cum-licensing Officer and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2005
Reported in: AIR2005MP195
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. This petition shall also dispose of W.P. No. 905/2004 which is identical in nature.2. Being aggrieved by the order Annexure-P/9 dated 18-3-2004 passed by Divisional Forest Officer, Indore respondent No. 1 herein whereby licence granted to the petitioner under the provisions of M.P. Kasta Chiran (Viniyam) Adhiniyam, 1984 (here in after shall be referred as 'Act') has been cancelled and the order dated 26-6-2004 vide Annexure-P/10 passed by respondent No. 2 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed, the present petition is filed.3. Short facts of the case are that originally M/s. Bharat Timber Trading Company, 49, Nivlakha, Indore was having the licence for operating the saw mill under the provisions of the Act. This licence was granted in the year 1984 and was renewed from the year 1985 to the year 1992. On 21 -12-1992 licensee informed the respondent No. 1 that saw machines have been sold with licence to Danvir Singh and Balbir Singh. Thereafter, bot...
Kalu Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4777
S.L. Kochar, J.1. This appeal aims at setting aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Shri Anil Abbas), Kukshi by judgment dated 11th September, 2001 in Sessions Trial No. 86/2001, thereby finding the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer R.I. for two months.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as unfolded before the trial Court was that on 3-1-2001, the appellant informed the police of P. S. Kukshi that the dead body of his wife Thavlibai was lying in the forest. On this information Merg. No. 01/2001 under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was registered and PW-6 R. S. Raghuvanshi Sub-Inspector started enquiry in to the Merg. PW-6 R. S. Raghuvanshi effected the seizures of iron-rod, slipper etc. from the place of occurrence. Its seizurememo is Ex. P/12. On merg enquiry,...
Kothari Laboratories Vs. the General Manager, District Industries Cent ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPLJ128; [2006]148STC572(MP)
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. The petitioner is a manufacturer of ointment, liquid for skin disease, for oral therapy and for external use. The petitioner was registered as a small-scale industry provisionally with the respondent No. 1 by registration certificate dated May 28, 1990 (annexure P 1). Later on, the petitioner was issued a permanent registration certificate dated February 17, 1994 effective from August 1, 1993 (annexure P 2). The petitioner also made an application for registration with the sales tax/commercial tax authorities, but it was refused by order dated October 31, 1992 (annexure P 3) against which the petitioner filed a revision before the Deputy Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Sagar, who vide order dated September 2, 1993 directed the Sales Tax Officer to issue certificate of registration both under the State and also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. A copy of the said order is annexure P4. In compliance with the said order, the certificate of registrati...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »