Madhya Pradesh Court February 2006 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.
State of M.P. Vs. Sumitrabai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPLJ408
A.K. Gohil, J.1. Appellant-State has filed this appeal under Section 378 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the acquittal of respondents from charge under Section 374, IPC by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna in Criminal Case No. 84/97. 2. As per prosecution story, on 25-5-1997, complainant-Ramcharan, father of Prakash, lodged a report at P. S. Dharnavda, District Guna that respondent No. 1-Sumitrabai resident of village Hariuman Moodra has forcibly sent his son Prakash who was aged about 13 years to Delhi and she says that if he will not return her money, his son will be forced to work in lieu of that without money. He further mentioned that one year back, he and his son were engaged to work for respondent-Sumitrabai in lieu of Rs. 12000/- and nine quintals of grain, and now Sumitrabai is demanding Rs. 20,222/- from him and that is the reason why she has sent his son Prakash to Delhi where he will compulsorily work as forced labourer without money. It was also mentioned that hi...
Hemraj Nebhomal Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2006
Reported in: [2008]306ITR40(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against an order, dated 7-3-2003, passed by the ITAT (for short hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in ITA No. 15 /IND/97. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on 8-9-2003 on the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether the Tribunal erred in law in maintaining disallowance on account of advertisement and sale promotion expenses without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case and by ignoring the decisions of the Supreme Court and jurisdictional High Court relied on by the appellant ?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the advertisement and safes promotion expenses incurred by the appellant for the purpose of business were rightly disallowed by the Tribunal ignoring past practice and overlooking the trade practice and commercial expediency?2. Heard Shri S.C. Bagadia, learned senior counsel with Shri D. Chhabra for assessee/appella...
Smt. Meera Jamil and ors. Vs. Bhopal Vikas Pradhikaran and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPHT78
Abhay M. Naik, J.1. Short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that initially the plaintiff/appellant No. 1 instituted a suit for perpetual injunction with respect to the land comprised in Survey No. 244, in area 9.70 decimal, situated at Village Shahpura, Tehsil Huzoor, District Bhopal. Subsequently, other plaintiffs/appellants joined in the suit. The land was stated to be owned by Prem Chand Saxena, on the strength of the registered sale deed dated 22-12-1957. After his death, the suit land devolved upon the present appellants being his legal heirs. Their names were duly mutated in the revenue records. The suit land was duly demarcated in the year 1988 by the Nazur Officer, Bhopal. The demarcation was again made by the Court of Tehsildar Huzoor on 5-6-1995 in presence of the Superintending Engineer and Executive Engineer of the Bhopal Development Authority. It has been further averred in the plaint that the Government of Madhya Pradesh allotted the land adjacent to the suit la...
Aruna Kumari Vs. Dr. Ambrish Kumar Sengar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPLJ104
S.S. Jha, J. 1. Appellant-Aruna Kumari was married to respondent-Dr. Ambrish Kumar Sengar on 14-2-1993. A child named Shashank was born within the wedlock on 26-9-1994. On account of some matrimonial dispute, appellant was living with her parents at Vasco-de-Gama, Goa along with her son. Ex parte decree for divorce was passed in favour of the respondent by the Court at Udaipur in the State of Rajasthan. Respondent claimed that the Court at Udaipur has found that the husband and wife had last resided at Udaipur in the year 1998. After the said ex parte decree, respondent entered into second marriage. Respondent then submitted an application under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act read with Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act for custody of the child Shashank in the Court of VIIth Additional District Judge. Gwalior. The then Seventh Additional District Judge. Gwalior passed an ex parte order dated 27-4-2002 and allowed the application under Section 25 of the Guard...
Akhilesh Gupta Vs. Arvind Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2477
S.S. Dwivedi, J.1. Appellant-claimant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'M.V. Act' for brevity), feeling aggrieved by the quantum of compensation amount awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Damoh in Motor Claim Case No. 278 of 1997 dated 24.7.1999 whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1,02,000 as compensation amount in favour of the appellant for the grievous injuries sustained by him in a motor accident.2. Brief facts of the case which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are that on 16.1.1989 the appellant-claimant was travelling in a car bearing No. CIK 43 along with 5-6 passengers, he was going to Jabalpur from Sagar. The aforesaid car was driven by K.V. Vishwakarma who also died in this accident. The said car had been dashed by bus No. CPV 2590 going to Gadagkota to Damoh. The aforesaid bus was driven by respondent No. 2 rashly and negligently. The owner of the aforesaid bus w...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shantibai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2679; [2006(111)FLR958]; 2006(3)MPLJ530
W.A. Shah, J.1. This common order governs the disposal of the appeals detailed below:(a) Misc. Appeal No. 1027 of 1999 preferred under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter 'the W.C. Act') in which the award appealed against by the insurer is of Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Labour Court, Ujjain dated 25.8.1999 in Case No. 5 of 1995 (Fatal).(b) Misc. Appeal No. 1033 of 1999 preferred under Section 30 of the W.C. Act in which the award appealed against by the insurer is of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Labour Court, Ujjain dated 25.8.1999 in Case No. 6 of 1995 (Fatal).(c) Misc. Appeal No. 1507 of 2000 preferred under Section 30 of the W.C. Act in which the defeated claimants have called into question the order of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Labour Court, Ujjain dated 3.11.2000 passed in Case No. 9 of 1995 (Fatal).2. At the relevant time truck No. MOU 551 owned by the respondent Abdul Rajjak was insured with the appellant New India Assurance...
Suresh Malik Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 1 and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2006
Reported in: (2006)IILLJ13MP
ORDERR.K. Gupta, J.1. Since W.P. No. 2653/1997 (Gemeran Remedies Ltd. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 1, Bhopal and Ors.), which was jointly heard with the present petition, has been decided and partly allowed by this Court vide its judgment dated February 14, 2006, therefore, accordingly the present petition filed by the petitioner, which is W.P. No. 575/1997 stands dismissed....
German Remedies Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 1 and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2006
Reported in: (2006)IILLJ8MP
ORDERR.K. Gupta, J.1. The present petition challenges the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 1, Bhopal. The said award is placed on record as Annexure P-l to the petition dated November 7, 1996. 2. The facts leading to the present case are that the respondent No. 2 was employed as a Medical Representative. He was issued a charge-sheet on March 5, 1990. Thereafter another charge-sheet was issued to the respondent No. 2 on May 8, 1990. A departmental enquiry by the petitioner was conducted against the respondent No. 2. In the said enquiry the was found guilty of the charges and thereafter an order of dismissal dated October 31, 1990 was passed. 3. Respondent No. 2 submitted an application for conciliation under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. On failure of the said conciliation proceedings the appropriate Government passed an order of reference for the adjudication of the industrial dispute by the respondent No. 1. The terms of the reference are ...
Shobhanath Pandey Son of Shri Harihar Prasad Pandey Vs. M.P. Electrici ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ196
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J. 1. By knocking the door of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the pregnability of the order dated 20.1.2000 passed by Industrial Court Bench at Jabalpur in Appeal No. 457/MPIR/98, copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure P/4. 2. The unfolded facts are that on 21.2.1971 the petitioner was appointed on the post of O.A. Grade III. Later on in November, 1980 he was promoted to the post of O.A. Grade II where he served up to 17.9.1991. On 11.12.1991 he was subjected to the departmental enquiry and charge sheet was issued against him. The charges were in regard to the obtaining the amount of LTC as well as medical reimbursement of his parents though the parents were not dependent on him. After holding the departmental enquiry, vide Annexure P/1 dated 17.9.1991 the petitioner was punished by the order of reversion and he was reverted from O.A. Grade II to O.A. Grade III. Simultaneously it was als...
Premnarayan Ramprasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)MPLJ339
S.C. Vyas, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 3-3-1994 passed in Sessions Trial No. 487/92 by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Shajapur whereby the appellants were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and under Section 323 of IPC and were sentenced for six months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 50/- and one months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 250/- each, this appeal has been preferred by the appellants.2. The prosecution story in brief was this that on 3-11-1992 at about 9.00 a.m. when complainant-Narayan was working at his agricultural field then appellant No. 2-Roshan came there with his bullock and tried to pass through the field of complainant-Narayan. Complainant objected then appellant-Roshan used filthy language and called him 'Bhangad.' His brother appellant No. 1-Prem also came there to caught hold of the complainant and then appellant-Roshan caused simple injury to the complainant by...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »