Madhya Pradesh Court February 2006 Judgments
Vimla Dubey and ors. Vs. Bhagwan Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2006
Reported in: II(2006)ACC727; 2007ACJ1375
S.A. Naqvi, J.1. This appeal is preferred by appellants-claimants against the award dated 2.1.2001 passed by Eighth Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No. 62 of 1996 for enhancement of compensation amount.2. The admitted facts are that Bhagwan Singh, respondent No. 1, was driver of the truck No. CIW 9039; Dara Singh, respondent No. 2, was the owner and National Insurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 3, was insurer of above said truck on the date of incident. Respondent No. 4 was the driver of Tatamobile No. MP 07-B 6843, Usha Pawaiya, respondent No. 5, was owner and United India Insurance Co. Ltd., respondent No. 6, was insurer of above said Tata-mobile on the date of incident. Accident occurred on 20.6.95. Deceased Bhagwanlal Dubey was travelling in a Tatamobile No. MP 07-B 6843, and truck No. CIW 9039 dashed against the said Tatamobile and Bhagwanlal Dubey got injuries in the incident and succumbed to the injuries. It has been held by learned Tribunal that accident oc...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chhabra Ginning Udhyog
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2006
Reported in: [2008]303ITR182(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against an order dated February 4, 2003, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for brevity hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in M.A. No. 47/Ind/2002 arising out of I.T.A. No. 1046/Ind/96. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in entertaining the application made under Section 254 of the Income-tax Act and further erred in granting the relief to the assessee by holding that there was an error apparent on face of the record as required to be made out in rectification of an order dated September 30, 2002, passed in I.T.A. No. 1046 of 1996?2. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I in respect of the miscellaneous income earned from ...
Tag this Judgment!Flour and Food Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: [2007]292ITR291(MP)
ORDER1. This is an appeal field by the assessee under Section 260A of the IT Act against the order, dt 10thJan., 2001, passed by learned Members of Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, in Appeal No. 971/Ind/1995 for the asst. yr. 1992-93. It was admitted for final hearing on following substantial questions of law:1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in disallowing interest to the extent of Rs. 2,70,000 on the ground that no interest was charged on the trade advance of Rs. 15 lakhs ?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has erred in holding that under Section 80HHC of the IT Act no deduction was allowable on the amount of Rs. 10,80,571 on the ground that there was no direct nexus between these receipts and the export business of the appellant-assessee ?2. The dispute relates to asst. yr. 1992-93. The assessee is engaged in manufacture and sale of Suji, Aata, Rawa, Maida, etc. In the year 1989, the assessee claimed...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Niwas Verma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)SLJ340(NULL)
ORDERAbhay M. Naik, J.1. Petitioner retired as Forester on 30th April, 1995. During his service period he was posted in the fuel depot at Rewa, from 1977 to 1983. The fuel wood used to be brought from different forest areas in the depot which was required to be taken on record by the petitioner. The fuel wood was obtained after felling of trees in the forest area where the fuel wood used to be kept on stock in the form of stacks in the size of 2 mt. x 1 mt. x 1 mt. The stock in the depot used to be kept on the basis of actual weight recorded on the weigh bridge whereas the accounting of despatch of fuel wood from the forest areas was being kept in the number of fuel stacks despatched from the particular forest area. In the transport challans the particulars of the number of stacks used to be mentioned.2. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Rule 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred as 'CCA Rules...
Tag this Judgment!Flour and Food Ltd. Vs. Jt. Cit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(MP)369
ORDERThis is an appeal filed by the assessee under section 260A of the Income Tax Act against the order, dated 10-1-2001, passed by learned Members of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore in Appeal No. 971/Ind./95 for the assessment year 1992-93. It was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law :'1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in disallowing interest to the extent of Rs. 2,70,000 on the ground that no interest was charged on the trade advance of Rs. 15 lakh ?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in holding that under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act no deduction was allowable on the amount of Rs. 10,80,571 on the ground that there was no direct nexus between these receipts and the export business of the appellant-assessee ?'2. The dispute relates to assessment year 1992-93. The assessee is engaged in manufacture and sale of Suji, Aat...
Tag this Judgment!Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mantola and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)MPLJ329
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this appeal preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity 'the Act') the insurer, namely, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, has called in question the legal propriety of the award dated 11-4-2002 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tikamgarh (in short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 26/99.2. The facts in a nut shell are that the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 initiated an action under Section 166 of the Act on the foundation that on 13-2-1999 their son, Jagdish, aged about 15 years was travelling in a bus bearing Registration No. MP.15-D/5695 from Maharajganj to Chhatarpur. The young boy, Jagdish, was sitting on the roof of the bus and about 8.00 p.m. while he was on roof top of the bus it dashed against a Mango tree as a result of which he fell down and sustained serious injuries. He was carried to Chhatarpur Hospital and thereafter to the Gwalior where he breathed his last on 16-2-1999. As the driver of the bus was driving ...
Tag this Judgment!Heavy Electricals Mazdoor Trade Union Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-2006
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR1180]; (2006)IILLJ1027MP; 2006(1)MPHT551; 2006(2)MPLJ289
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of notification dated 10-10-2005 issued by the State Government under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 as well as the vires of Sub-section (4) of Section 1 of the said Act.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of the petition are that under Entry 22 of List III to the Second Schedule to the Constitution read with Article 246 of the Constitution, both Parliament and State Legislature have concurrent power to make law relating to trade union and industrial and labour disputes. In exercise of such powers, the State Legislature has enacted the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') with the assent, of the President of India. Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Act provides that Section 1 and Section 112 of the Act shall come into force at once and the State Government may, by notifica...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhaiyalal Parmar Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPLJ522; 2007(2)SLJ285(NULL)
ORDERJ.K. Maheshwari, J.1. This petition has been filed assailing the order dated 9.3.2000 passed by respondent No. 3 by which on revocation of the suspension, a direction was issued for non-payment of the salary for such period except the subsistence allowance along with a direction to count such period permissible for the purpose of pension.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Gram Sachiv with effect from 14.9.1965. As per the orders issued by the Government in the year 1982 the services of the petitioner was absorbed as Gram Sevak in the Panchayat and Social Welfare Department. In the year 1996, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner at Crime No. 80/96 under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. Because the petitioner was under detention for more than 48 hours, therefore, as per order dated 13.10.1996, he was placed under suspension. Vide order dated 29.11.1996 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 3399/96, petitioner was released on bail. Thereafter, ...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shanta Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1738
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the award dated 23-8-1995 passed by MACT, Dewas in Claim Case No. 9/1990, whereby the claim petition filed by the respondent No. 1 has been allowed and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and appellant has been held liable for making payment of Rs. 40,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum, the present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that an accident took place on 23-8-1989, in which the husband of respondent No. 1 deceased Jagannath died who was sitting in the offending Tempo bearing registration No. MOU-1039, which was being driven by respondent No. 2, owned by respondent No. 3 and insured with appellant. A claim petition was filed by respondent No. 1 being the legal representative of deceased Jagannath. The claim petition was contested by the appellant on various grounds including on the ground that liability of the Insurance Company is limited. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed the issues, recor...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Mansur Ali Khan Vs. Saifia Education Society and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ428
ORDERS.R. Waghmare, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 12-12-2005, passed by 9th Additional District Judge, Bhopal in Civil Suit No. 5-A/2005, allowing the application of respondent No. 1 /plaintiff under Order 18, Rule 4 read with Order 3 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the 'CPC').2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 Saifia Education Society, Bhopal filed a suit against petitioner Mohd. Mansur Ali Khan and respondent Nos. 2 and 3, as the successors to Smt. Begum Sazida Sultan, former ruler of Bhopal as her legal heirs, since Late Smt. Begum Sazida Sultan had entered into an agreement to sell land bearing Khasra Nos. 47, 48, 50, 51 admeasuring 35.70 Acres at Bhopal, with respondent No. 1 Saifia Education Society by agreement dated 7-2-1985. However, the sale-deed could not be executed due to the death of Smt. Begum Sazida Sultan and respondent No. 1 Saifia Education Society filed a suit before the 9th Additional Dis...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »