Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ashadevi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC584
S.S. Jha, J.1. Since these appeals arise out of common award, they are heard together.2. Only question involved in these appeals is whether the appellant Insurance Company has rightly been held responsible to indemnify the insured.3. Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company, Mr. B.N. Malhotra, has submitted that from the evidence on record, these are the cases of composite negligence of drivers of two vehicles. As such apart from the appellant Insurance Company, respondent National Insurance Co. Ltd. is also jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Respondent National Insurance Co. Ltd. has insured the offending jeep bearing registration No. MP07H/1828 which had dashed against the tanker bearing registration No. HNU9877 insured with the appellant Insurance Company.4. We have heard Counsel for the parties and perused the evidence on record.5. In evidence, witnesses have deposed that while the tanker was overtaking another vehicle, it collided with the jeep which was comi...
Chandra Shekhar Shrivastava Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR789]; 2005(4)MPHT432; 2006(1)MPLJ183
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. This petition was originally filed before the State Administrative Tribunal at Jabalpur on 15-4-1998. However, on account of abolition of the Tribunal, this petition has been received by this Court for its adjudication.2. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging the pregnability of the impugned order Annexure A-9, 2-3-1998 by which he has been compulsorily retired under Rule 44 (1)(d) of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (in short 'Pension Rules') w.e.f. 30-6-1998.3. The contention of Shri Nagu, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Block Development Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 350-650/- on 22-5-72. Later on he was sent on deputation in the same department on 5-5-81 on the post of Assistant Project Officer in District Rural Development Authority in the higher pay scale of Rs. 425-900/-. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that though the respondents under the clutch...
Ramballabh Gupta Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: [2007]288ITR347(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this writ shall also govern disposal of other connected writ petitions being Writ Petn. Nos. 405, 406, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 461, 462, 466, 467 and 468 of 2005, as in all these writs common question of fact and law is involved.2. By filing this writ under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner--an assessee under the IT Act seeks to challenge a notice, dt. 24th March, 2004 (Annex. P-2), issued by an AO (respondent No. 1) under s. 148 of IT Act to the petitioner for making reassessment of the asst. yr. 1997-98.3. In the opinion of AO, he has a reason to believe that income of petitioner (assessee) chargeable to tax for the asst. yr. 1997-98 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 148 ibid and hence, impugned notice is issued and served on the petitioner. In support, on being asked by the petitioner, the AO has supplied the reasons (Annex. P-6).4. The challenge to impugned notice is made essentially on t...
Jagdish Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ996; 2006(1)MPHT188; 2005(4)MPLJ411
ORDERRakesh Saksena, J.1. This revision has been preferred by the accused Jagdish Singh against the order dated 14-10-1998 passed by learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, in Sessions Trial No. 215/98, whereby the learned Trial Court has taken cognizance against the petitioner under the provision of Section 193, Cr.PC.2. In brief, the prosecution story is that in the night of 29-11-1997 complainant Wakil Singh and his maternal uncle Rameshwar Gurjar (injured) were going to sleep in their garage situated in Village Sunarpura. When they were talking, suddenly accused Kalla alias Kalyan Singh Gurjar armed with 'Katta', Kartar Singh armed with 'lathi', Ramesh Gurjar and Jagdish Gurjar (petitioner) armed with 'Katta' came at the window of the garage and on exhortation of Kartar Singh, Ramesh fired his 'Katta' at Rameshwar causing injury on his left hip. When Rameshwar got up and sat on the cot, then accused Kalla fired another shot, which hit on the right side of his chest. It is s...
Orient Paper Mills Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR255]; (2006)ILLJ1136MP; 2006(1)MPLJ209
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. By this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for quashment of order dated July 9, 1991 passed by respondent No. 1 (Annexure P/13) whereby the petitioner establishment has been held to be liable under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for brevity the Act) and has been directed to extend its benefit to the eligible employees of transporters engaged by the petitioner for supply of raw material of regular production of establishment. The petitioner by amendment has further prayed to restrain respondent No. 1 from quantifying the liability of the petitioner pursuant to the order Annexure P/13 dated July 9, 1991.2. In brief the case of petitioner is Orient Paper Mills (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') is a mill established at a village Amlai in Shahdol District. The erstwhile Part C State of Madhya Pradesh invited entrepreneurs to establish a paper mill withi...
Sushila Bai and ors. Vs. Kunwar Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ1435
U.C. Maheshwari, J.1. Being aggrieved by the award dated 6.2.1998, passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal in Claim Case No. 69 of 1996, appellants-claimants have preferred this appeal against dismissal of the claim petition.2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 3.2.1996, at about 9.30 in the evening Prakash Sharma was going on his scooter bearing registration No. MP 4-Q 504 from Habibganj Dairy Road to Bawadia Kalan, Bhopal. On reaching near the water-head tank, Habibganj Naka, his scooter was overtaken by a dumper/truck bearing the registration No. MP 20-C 9012 driven by Kunwar Singh, respondent No. 1, in a rash and negligent manner, after overtaking it at some distance without any indication of the brake lights or any other signs suddenly said dumper was stopped in middle of the road. Due to this negligent act of the driver of truck, Prakash, who was riding scooter behind the dumper truck rammed into the truck from back side, he sustained fatal injuries on head and ...
Smt. Rekha Rana and ors. Vs. Smt. Ratnashree Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: AIR2006MP107; 2006(1)MPLJ103
R.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. The Respondent herein filed a suit for ejectment (Civil Suit No. 423-A/2002 on the file of 3rd Civil Judge, Class-II, Jabalpur transferred and renumbered as C. S. No. 20-A/2004 on the file of 13th Civil Judge, Class-II, Jabalpur) against the petitioners herein tinder the provisions of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act. In the said suit, the Respondent filed an application under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, 1872 ('Act' for short) seeking permission to lead secondary evidence in regard to the sale-deed dated 5-11-1997 executed in her favour by the previous owners (Ramdas and others) by producing a certified copy of the deed.2. The Respondent claims that the original sale-deed is filed in F.A. No. 337/2003 pending on the file of this Court. It is also alleged that the execution of the said sale-deed by Ramdas and others in her favour was not disputed by the petitioners herein (tenants), but specifically admitted in the earlier suit filed by them (C.S. No. 104-A...
Ramballabh Gupta Vs. Asstt. Cit and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: (2005)199CTR(MP)649
ORDERA.M. SAPRE, J.The decision rendered in this writ shall also govern disposal of other connected writ petitions being Writ Petn. Nos. 405, 406, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 461, 462, 466, 467 and 468 of 2005, as in all these writs common question of fact and law is involved.2. By filing this writ under Arts. 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-an assessee under the Income Tax Act seeks to challenge a notice, dated 24-3-2004 (Annex. P-2), issued by an assessing officer (respondent No. 1) under section 148 of Income Tax Act to the petitioner for making reassessment of the assessment year 1997-98.3. In the opinion of assessing officer, he has a reason to believe that income of petitioner (assessee) chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1997-98 has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 148 ibid and hence, impugned notice is issued and served on the petitioner. In support, on being asked by the petitioner, the assessing officer has supplied the reasons (Annex....
Arun Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)MPHT365
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the transfer order Annexure P-6 issued by respondent No. 3, by which the petitioner has been transferred from District Office, Panchayat and Social Justice, Betul to the District Office, Panchayat and Social Justice, Chhindwara on administrative grounds. This order has been assailed by the petitioner on the following grounds :--(i) That within a period of 3 years, the petitioner has been transferred frequently and near about 7 transfer orders has been passed against the petitioner.(ii) That, transfer order is in violation of the Transfer Policy Annexure P-7 (Para 10.6), which provides that the transfer order of the Executive Officer and Employees shall be made ordinarily after completion of 3 years period at one place.2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court, in the case of Home Secretary, U.T. of Chandigarh and Anr. v. Darshjit Singh Grewal and Ors. : (1993)4...
Anand Pratap Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT49
ORDERS.K. Pande, J.1. Heard.2. Admit.3. Learned Counsel for the State/respondent takes notice.I.A. No. 5614/2005:4. This is an application under Section 389(1), Cr.PC for suspension of sentence and release on bail.5. Special Judge, Shahdol in S.T. No. 51/00, vide impugned judgment dated 12-7-05 recording conviction of appellant under Section 304(II), 330/34, IPC sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of five years on each count and to pay fine Rs. 500/-; in default to suffer further imprisonment for a period of three months.6. Admittedly on 19-12-97, appellant Police Personnel remained posted at Police Station, Chachai. Deceased Suhawan aged about 25 years resident of Village Vakeli was one of the suspect of crime relating to murder. It is alleged that the police on 19-12-97 picked up Suhawan from Village Vakeli. On 19-12-97 he was taken to the hospital where on examination has been declared dead. Merg intimation in relation to death of Suhawan was recorded. Preparing inquest Panch...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »