Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
Secretary General, Family Planning Association and ors. Vs. Rajesh Kum ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR142]
Arun Mishra, J.1. In these petitions, petitioners have assailed award passed by the Labour Court, Bhopal, by which, reinstatement has been ordered with 50% backwages.2. Respondent No. 1 in each of the petitions was employed in the project run by the Family Planning Association of India. Each of them rendered the services for approximately 5 years. Their services were terminated on 31.12.1999. On dispute being raised, case was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court, Bhopal. The benefit of Provident Fund, Gratuity, Medical and Earned Leave was extended during the course of employment. The main work which was carried out related to family planning in the rural areas. It was submitted that retrenchment was made illegally. There was no good reason to dispense with the service. Project did not come to an end. Work was of permanent nature. Employer is continuing its activities. Several persons have been reinstated. Fresh appointments have also been made. Thus, it is a case of hire and ...
Rajesh Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT84; 2005(3)MPLJ174
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. Petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by an order dated 3-3-2005 by which appointment of the petitioner as a Special Public Prosecutor made vide Annexure P-2, dated 27th November, 2002 has been terminated without assigning any reason.2. Petitioner is an Advocate practising in the District Datia since 1988. It is the case of the petitioner that considering his performance and ability, the District Magistrate and the District Judge, Datia recommended his case for appointment as Special Public Prosecutor and after evaluating his merit and suitability vide order (Annexure P-2), dated 27th November, 2002, he has been appointed as a Special Public Prosecutor for a period of three years. In the quarterly meeting held by the District Magistrate and the District Judge monitoring the work and performance of various officers, working of the petitioner was appreciated and there was no complaint against the petitioner and in an arbitrary manner, appointment of...
Kammoda Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT98; 2005(3)MPLJ246
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This appeal is directed against the conviction of appellant under Section 302, IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine one year's further R.I. by Additional Sessions Judge, Pichhore in Sessions Trial No. 112/90, vide judgment dated 1-11-1991.2. As per prosecution story on 2-1-1990 Officer Incharge of Police Station, Khaniadhana received information from complainant Pahalua, who is Chowkidar and resident of Village Gudar that one dead body of an unknown lady is lying in the forest of Gudar under the stones. On the basis of the aforesaid report merg was registered, thereafter matter was investigated. Investigating Officer P.W. 15 R.V. Sharma recorded the statement of Chowkidar and thereafter informed the Tehsildar as well as the doctor. Deadbody was taken out by Tehsildar and its seizure memo Ex. P-17 was prepared. Photographs of the dead body were taken and spot map was also prepared. Pieces of rope, bangles and s...
Munnalal Mishra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT125
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. The petitioner was working as a Khalasi in the Central Railway. He was arrested in a criminal case under Sections 302, 147, 148 and 149 of the IPC in the year 1991, as a consequence of which, he was kept under suspension by order dated 19-2-1991. After trial, the Additional Sessions Judge, Maihar, District Satna, convicted him on 9-10-1993 and he was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. As a consequence of such conviction and sentence, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 9-3-1995. Such dismissal was not in pursuance of any disciplinary proceedings by holding an inquiry but on the basis of the special procedure which enabled the employer to dismiss an employee on the ground of conduct which led to his conviction on a criminal charge.2. The petitioner was being paid subsistence allowance from the date of suspension to the date of his dismissal from service (19-2-1991 to 8-3-1995). The subsistence allowance was stopped with effect from the date of ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Premier Proteins Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)55; [2005]278ITR252(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the CIT under Section 260A of the IT Act against an order dt. 26th Feb., 1999, passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 467/Ind/1995. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on the following substantial question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that because of the note left in return regarding cash compensatory support, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is not leviable in the case in spite of amendment to Section 28 of IT Act by way of insertion of Clause (iiib) ?'2. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. Veena Mandlik for the appellant and Shri G.M. Chaphekar, learned senior counsel with Shri D.S. Kale for respondent.3. The question arises out of asst. yr. 1989-90. It relates to imposition of penalty on the assessee (a limited company) under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act.4. In the opinion of AO, since the assessee, while submitting the re...
State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Hira S/O Jagannath
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR510]; (2005)IIILLJ568MP; 2005(3)MPHT287; 2005(2)MPLJ539
ORDERS.K. Gangele, J.1. The petitioners filed this petition against the order dated 19-12-2003 passed in Appeal No. 74/MPIR/2003 dismissing his appeal and upholding the order of the Labour Court. There are near about 213 petitions have been filed by the same petitioners against the orders of Industrial Court and Labour Court. In all the petitions common question of law and facts are involved, hence they are being decided by this common order.2. Question for determination before this Court is 'Whether a daily wages employee working in Government Department, i.e., P.W.D. which comes within the definition of industry can be classified as permanent employee as per the provision of Rule 2 of M.P. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules, 1963 hereinafter called as Rules of 1963. The rules have been framed by the State Government under Section 21 of the M.P. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961 herein after called the Act of 1961.3. The respondent a daily wages employee fil...
Arun Kumar Vs. Krishna Gopal Sharma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT391; 2005(4)MPLJ24
ORDERRajendra Menon, J. 1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenge is made to the order dated 13-8-2004 passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Class-II, Dabra, in Suit No. 62-A/2002 directing the petitioner/tenant to deposit rent @ Rs. 150/-(Rupees One hundred and fifty only) per month w.e.f. the year 1991 and to further deposit rent every month during the pendency of the proceedings.2. Respondent filed a suit seeking eviction and possession. Petitioner has filed the written statement however a dispute was raised with regard to rate of rent and an application under Section 13 (2) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act was filed by the petitioner. The order impugned is passed on this application. Petitioner has challenged the impugned order to the extent it directs for deposit of rent beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the statute, i.e., three years.3. It is the case of the petitioner that suit was filed in the year 2002 and therefore only arrears of r...
Ramnath Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT12
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Bulwer had proclaimed long back :Personal liberty is the paramount essential to human dignity and human happiness.John Dryden while speaking about 'liberty' had stated with committal serenity in the following terms:--Oh, give me liberty! For even were paradise my prison still I should long to leap the crystal walls.Milton eulogizing liberty had so pronounced :Where liberty dwells, there is my country.The philosophers, thinkers, the law givers and the statesment have time and again accentuated on the imperative characteristics of 'liberty', for without liberty, life is not worth living. Liberty spiritualizes a human soul and clothes the living process with immense dignity. Life fondly embraces liberty and in turn, liberty enlivens life. The beauty and perfection in a way get synchronized. The nature within wonderfully corresponds to the state of liberty as guided and conferred by law. I may profitably reproduced a few lines from Wayne Krome :Truth and love are my ...
Chhota Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT267
A.K. Gohil, J.1. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 5th September, 1991 passed by Special Judge, Gwalior in Special Case No. 8/85, whereby the Trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 302/34 of IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant.2. The facts shorn of unnecessary details lie in a narrow compass. The appellant has been convicted with the aid of Section 34 of IPC. The incident took place on 5-5-84 at about 6 p.m. in front of the house of the deceased in Mohalla Jangipura at Dabra. The appellant who was carrying a 12 bore gun in his hand came in the company of Charanjeet on the spot. Charanjeet took the gun from the appellant and fired two repeat shots at Babulal, as a result of which Babulal fell down inside the veranda of his house and thereafter all the three accused persons fled away from the spot. Babulal died while being to police station. The report of the incident was lodged by Mithlesh (P.W. 5), wife...
Wakil Khan and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3410; 2006(1)MPLJ259
S.L. Kochar, J1. The appellants called in question the legality of Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, Shajapur in Special Sessions Trial No. 111/2004 thereby convicting the appellant Wakil Khan under Section 302 of the IPC and appellants Tajuddin and Bhuru Khan Under Section. 302/34 of IPC, sentencing each of the appellants to suffer R. I. for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of fine, each of them to suffer further three months R.I.2. The prosecution case as put forth before the trial Court in short is that on 5-7-2004, Amrlt Bus was going from Sonkatch to Khuravar, which was driven by driver Babusingh. The bus was full of passengers and some passengers were standing. When bus reached at village Aagkhedi, deceased Mahesh, Rambabu (P.W. 2), Jagdish (P.W. 5) and one Ram Singh also boarded the bus. In this bus, the appellants were already travelling and they were standing. When bus proceeded from village Aagkhedi, appellant Wakilkhan asked dece...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »