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.
Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Ajit Nirkhe and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC593
S. Samvatsar, J.1. Both these appeals arise against the same judgment dated 9.12.95 passed by Third Addl. Member Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shivpuri, in Claim Case No. 12/95, whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 2,95,000 plus interest thereon and Counsel fee Rs. 5,000 to the claimant. Appeal No. 503/97 is filed by the Insurance Company, while Appeal No. 507/97 is filed by the owner of the vehicle. In these cases cross-objection is also filed by the claimant.2. Brief facts of the case are that the claimant was travelling in a bus No. MBU 678 which was going from Shivpuri towards Indore. When bus crossed Kolaras the bus met with an accident in which the claimant get injured. The claimant was student of Veterinary College, show studying in the first year. In the said accident he got injury on his head and fell unconscious. He remained unconscious for three months. Subsequently, he recovered but his mental condition was disturbed. He lost his memory. His eye...
Dev Karan Vs. Suresh Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-2005
Reported in: III(2006)ACC94; 2006(1)MPLJ288
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the award dated 20.12.2002 passed by MACT, Indore in Claim Case No. 10/2002, whereby claim petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed, the present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that the appellant filed claim petition alleging that on 13.2.1991, an accident took place in which appellant sustained permanent injuries. The claim petition was registered as 10/2002. The allegations were made in the petition denied by the respondents. It was also alleged that since the accident has taken place on 13.2.1991 and claim petition is filed on 6.2.2002, therefore, the claim petition was not maintainable. It was also prayed that petition be dismissed on account of non-maintainability. On the basis of the pleadings by the parties learned Tribunal framed the issues. Issue No. 4 was to the effect that whether the claim filed after 11 years is not maintainable. After hearing the parties the learned Tribunal has held that claim petitio...
Rajpal Singh Vs. C.B.i.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)MPHT299; 2005(4)MPLJ482
ORDERU.C. Maheshwari, J.1. This petition is directed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code for setting aside and quashment of the order dated 28-4-2005, passed by third Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge/CBI, Bhopal in Special Case No. 6/042. It is not in dispute that a trial under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of corruption Act, 1988 is pending against the applicant in which Shri Ajay Tiwari (P. W. 2), the alleged Manager of M/s. Communication Ltd. Co. was examined on dated 16-12-2004 as prosecution witnesses. Subsequent to this witness some other witnesses have also been examined. The aforesaid witness became hostile and did not support to the prosecution case. Subsequently he filed a complaint on dated 11-3-2005, to the Ministry of Personal Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personal and Training) Regulation New Delhi alleging that he was under threat and compulsion to give such statement as given on aforesaid date. By explaining the cir...
Ganpatilal Vs. Rajesh @ Raju and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
Reported in: 1(2006)ACC568
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the amount awarded vide award dated 24.1.2004passed by IIIrd MACT, Jagra, Distt. Ratlam, in Claim Case No. 6/2002, whereby sum of Rs. 26,110 has been awarded along with interest @ 8% per annum the present appeal has been filed.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that break-up of Rs. 26,110 is as under:Towards permanent disability : Rs. 12,210Towards loss of income : Rs. 6,000Towards pain and sufferings : Rs. 5,000Towards special diet : Rs. 1,000Towards medical expenses : Rs. 1,8253. It is submitted that age of the appellant was 25 years. At the time of accident he was working as Driver. There was fracture in tibia bone in the right leg and as per medical evidence the appellant was plastered twice. He remained on bed rest for a period of six months. It is alleged that there was permanent disability of 4%. It is submitted that after taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount awarded ...
Narendra Vs. Smt. Shanti Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC203
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the amount awarded vide award dated 14.8.2002 passed by MACT, Ujjain in Claim Case No. 54/2001, whereby a sum of Rs. 20,000/- has been awarded along with interest @ 9% p.a., the present appeal has been filed.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that there was a fracture in Patela bone of left leg, there were five pieces out of which two could not be replaced. It is submitted that the breakup of Rs. 20,000/- is as under:Rs. 8,000/- towards medical expenses.Rs. 2,000/- towards loss of income.Rs. 2,000/- towards special diet.Rs. 8,000/- towards pain and sufferings.3. It is submitted that appellant was running the business of Sarees, could not open his shop for a period of three months. It is also submitted that medical bills of Rs. 28,222/- were not considered by the Tribunal.4. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. It is also submitted that there is no medi...
Nanuram S/O Bhanwarlal and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4586; 2004(2)MPLJ13
1. By this appeal the appellants seek quashment of the judgment of conviction and sentence passed against, them by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Indore in S.T. No. 383/98 thereby convicting the appellant Nanuram under Section 302and 323/34, IPC and sentencing him to suffer Imprisonment for life and R.I. for six months respectively and appellant Meharban Singh under Section 302/34 and Section 323, Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to suffer R.I. for one year respectively.2. Co-accused Gendalal was also tried alongwith the aforesaid appellants, but he has been acquitted from the charges levelled against him. The trial proceeded showing the co-accused Rugnath alias Raghunath as absconding.3. The prosecution case against the appellants is that on 28-11-97, the Station House Officer of P. S. Lasudiya (PW-1) Mourya received a telephonic message from M. Y. Hospital, Indore that one Shankar resident of village Dhabli Kankad who was brought in injured ...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunita Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ311
S.R. Waghmare, J.1. These are two appeals arising out of the same accident and award dated 21.7.1999 passed by the First Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Katni in Claim Case No. 271 of 1996.2. M.A. No. 1861 of 1999 has been filed by the non-applicant National Insurance Co. Ltd. challenging the award on the ground that the liability has been wrongly fastened on the insurance company since the driver of the alleged vehicle causing the accident did not possess a valid licence at the time of the accident and due to breach in terms and conditions of the insurance policy the company cannot be held liable to pay the compensation.3. M.A. No. 2007 of 1997 has been filed by the claimants assailing the award mainly on the grounds that the compensation awarded is too low and needs to be enhanced since the Tribunal has erred in assessing monthly income of the deceased and, therefore, drawn wrong conclusion regarding the dependency thereto and the awarded amount need to be modified since ...
NitIn Pahadiya Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(MP)321
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the assesses under Section 260A of the IT Act against a common order, dt. 7th Sept., 2001 (Annex. P-2), passed by Tribunal in ITA No. 253/Ind/1996 and ITA No. 512/Ind/1996. The appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law :Whether the payments made to the agriculturists in the facts and circumstances of the case, would fall under Section 69C of the IT Act 2. In order to appreciate the issue involved, few relevant facts need to be mentioned.3. The appellant-an assessee is a proprietor of one concern known as Mahavir Ginning Factory at Kukshi. He is engaged in the business of ginning. In his manufacturing activity, the appellant is required to purchase cotton.4. In the assessment year in question (1992-93), the dispute arose on certain purchases made by the assessee of cotton from some agriculturists, amounting to Rs. 3,00,779. In order to decide this issue, the AO called those agriculturists from whom the...
M.M. Metals (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-2005
Reported in: (2007)5VST384(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. By filing this writ under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the revisionary order, dated March 30, 1998 passed by the Commissioner, Commercial Tax (annexure E) in revision No. 147/Indore/97/Prantiya, which in turn arises out of an assessment order, dated June 30, 1997 (annexure D) in case No. 88/92/1/96/19-1 (Prantiya) passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Indore.2. In short and in substance, the question that arises for consideration in this case is, whether the petitioner is entitled to claim set-off on the tax-paid goods purchased by the petitioner during the period in question as contemplated in Section 8(1)(a) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, when petitioner was holding a recognition certificate under Section 16C of the Act?3. Facts of the case are very short and involve no dispute on them.4. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of aluminium utensils/circles...
Anil Kumar Pandey Vs. Daulat Prasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT463; 2005(4)MPLJ467
ORDERRakesh Saksena, J. 1. Applicant has filed this petition under Section 482, Cr.PC for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 100/2003 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sagar and/or the order dated 28-1-2003 passed in aforesaid case taking cognizance against the applicant under Sections 294, 506-II, IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.2. In brief, facts of the present case are that applicant had entered into a contract with respondent Daulat Prasad for construction of his house. This agreement was entered into on 3- 9-1998. There were some disputes about the construction and about the amount of money to be paid to respondent contractor. On 6-2-2002 respondent/complainant filed a private complaint against the applicant on the allegations that because of the dispute in respect of the contract applicant did not pay his money which was outstanding for the construction. When on 16-4-2000, he demanded...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »