Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
Vindhyachal Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2006
Reported in: (2007)7VST197(MP)
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In these writ petitions the question involved is whether service tax on packaging i.e. bottling and labelling of liquor, can be exacted from the distillers and whether they can pass on this liability to the contractors obtaining the supplies from them.2. The petitioners are distillers/retail contractors, licence has been granted for supply of country made liquor for the warehouses situated in various districts of the State of Madhya Pradesh to distillers. The retail contractors take supply from the distillers under the terms of CS-I licence issued to distillers and CS-II licence issued to the retail contractors. The distiller is entitled to receive the cost price of liquor from the Government and the sealing and bottling charges from the retail contractors. The retail contractors are required to deposit the bottling and sealing charges in advance before lifting the country liquor from the warehouse. Licence (P-3) was issued to M/s. Vidhyachal Distilleries Pvt. Lt...
Harinarayan Vs. Prem Narayan and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-2006
Reported in: [2006(110)FLR180]
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal, filed by the claimant under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, against an order dated 1.3.2002, passed by learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Dewas in W.C. (N.F.) Case No. 8 of 1999. Facts are these:Appellant is claimant. He was a driver and was in the employment of respondent No. 1 (non-applicant No. 1). On 5.11.1998 while he was driving the vehicle (MP 04-E 0848), met with accident and suffered serious injuries on his body. Due to these injuries his whole body was virtually paralysed. Since, the injuries suffered by him were suffered by the claimant when he was in the employment and was also arising out of an employment; he filed a claim petition under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act against the respondent No. 1, i.e., employer and the owner of vehicle which he was driving and the insurer, non-applicant No. 2 with whom the said vehicle was insured. The case was contested by the respondents. By award dated 17.1.2...
In Re: Boura @ Drigpal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ72
ORDERRakesh Saxena, J.1. This case is a reference made by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in S.T. No. 49/04 under Section 318 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') wherein by order dated 24-12-99, he has passed the order of conviction of the accused Boura @ Drigpal for the offence under Section 376, IPC.2. In this case, the accused is a deaf and dumb man, therefore, after conviction, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has made this reference for passing appropriate order. Section 318 of the Code reads as follows :318. Procedure where accused does not understand proceedings.-- If the accused, though not of unsound mind, cannot be made to understand the proceedings, the Court may proceed with the inquiry or trial; and, in the case of a Court other than a High Court, if such proceedings result in a conviction, the proceedings shall be forwarded to the High Court with a report of the circumstances of the case, and the High Cou...
Vijay Singh and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ78
ORDERA.K. Patnaik C.J.1. The petitioners in all these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India arc all candidates for the Pre-P.G. Medical & Dental test for admissions into the Post Graduate and Post Graduate Diploma Courses in the Medical and Dental Colleges in the State of M.P. In the Rules, made by the State Government relating to entrance to Post Graduate and Post Graduate Diploma courses in Medical and Dental Colleges in the State of M.P. in 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 2005), to be eligible for the entrance examination, a candidate was required to be a bonafide resident of Madhya Pradesh or must have passed all MBBS/BDS examinations from Medical/Dental College of Madhya Pradesh. A new set of Rules has been framed by the Slate Government, relating to entrance to Post Graduate and Post Graduate Diploma; Medical & Dental Courses in Medical and Dental Colleges in the State of M.P. in 2006, called the Pre-PG Medical & Dental Post Graduate Entrance...
Gendalal and ors. Vs. the State of Madhyha Pradesh, Through Its Police ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ201
Abhay K. Gohil, J.1. In this appeal the appellants have challenged their conviction under Section 302, 302/149 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default of payment of fine further six months' R.I. Appellants were tried for the aforesaid charges in Session Trial No. 294/95 before the IInd A.D.J. Guna and vide judgment dated 30.9.1999, they have been convicted.2. As per prosecution story, on 13.6.1995 between 8-9 p.m. deceased Ramhet accompanied with Guddibai, Nathulal and Gulabbai lodged the report at Police Choki Ukavad of this effect that he had gone to Raghogarh and he was returning back by the local bus. After getting down from the local bus, he was coming to house. In the way at 8-9 p.m. appellants Parvatsingh, Premnarayan, Gendalal, Kailash and Nannulal armed with farsa and lathi came out rom the bushes and beat him. Parvat Singh inflicted lathi blow on the leg, Gendalal inflicted farsa in the left leg, which was cut and fractured and when he fe...
Amir Patel and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)MPLJ393
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. This writ petition was filed by petitioners way back in the year 1996. They were students of law faculty at the relevant time in the Govt. Arts and Commerce College, Harda. Petitioners came to know that Bar Council of India (hereinafter referred to as 'BCI') had issued a circular dated 7-3-96 with respect to appointment of a whole time Principal and at least two other whole-time teachers. The same came into force with effect from 1st July, 1996. The Law Colleges were required to strictly follow the rules. Respondent No. 4 wrote letter to Commissioner, Higher Education demanding creation of 4 posts of full-time Lecturers of Law in Govt. Arts and Commerce College, Harda. Respondent No. 2/University wrote to the Law Colleges to comply with the directions of BCI. Respondent No. 4 again sent a reminder to the Commissioner, Higher Education for appointment of 4 full-time Lecturers. However, posts were not sanctioned, hence, petition was filed. Prayer has been made by p...
N. Hanumantha (No. 920990014) Constable/Bugler S/O Netashappa Vs. Unio ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ60
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the validity of impugned orders Annexure-P-5 dated 1.3.2000 passed by respondent No. 5, Annexure-P-7 dated 25.10.2001 passed by respondent No. 4 in departmental appeal and Annexure-P-9 dated 7.3.2003 passed by respondent No. 3 dismissing the revision petition of the petitioner.2. No exhaustive statement of facts is necessary for the disposal of this petition. Suffice it to state that at the relevant point of time the petitioner was serving on the post of Constable/Bugler. He remained absent w.e.f. 3.8.1999 to 2.9.1999 and his past record was also found to be bad as he remained unauthorizedly absent for 274 days on two earlier occasions. Therefore, he was subjected to a departmental inquiry and two charges were framed against him which read thus:ARTICLE-IThat, the said No. 920990014 Ct/Bug. N. Hanumantha of HQ/107 Bn. RAF/CRPF while functioning as Ct/Bug co...
Ram Kishan Vs. Manoj Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: II(2006)ACC685
S. Samvatsar, J.1. This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the award dated 6.9.1999 passed by I Additional Member Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Morena in claim case No. 201/97.2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-claimant has filed an application for compensation alleging that on 27.8.1997 he met with an accident with truck No. MP 07 A 8157 which was owned by respondent No. 1, driven by respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3.3. According to the claim petition on 27.8.1997 at about 12.30 present appellant along with deceased Purushottam was travelling in a tractor UP 80 F 1014. At that time, truck which was driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 2 dashed against the trolley due to which the present appellant was injured. Claimant filed an application for compensation for the injuries sustained by him. Claims Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 15,000 towards permanent disablement and pain and suffering, Rs. 15,000 towards medical expenses ...
Prabhulal Vs. Babulal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2748
ORDERS.K. Seth, J.1. This appeal by the claimant arises out of the award dated 28-11-2005 passed by the IInd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore in M.V. Case No. 162/2003. By the impugned award, claim for compensation preferred by the appellant under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for short) was rejected.2. Briefly stated, relevant facts found by the Tribunal are as under. Appellant claimed that he was employed as driver with respondent No. 1, owner of truck bearing registration No. MP 09-D-1041. On 30-9-2003 appellant was bringing the loaded truck to Indore and he was waylaid and assaulted by unknown armed miscreants. Miscreants not only robbed Rs. 1500/- but also caused injuries to appellant, consequently appellant is unable to work as driver any longer. Appellant, therefore, lodged claim under Section 163A of the Act, for compensation against respondents jointly and severally, they being owner and insurer of the truck on the fate...
State of M.P. Vs. Manish Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ259
ORDER1. Heard on I.A. No. 10194/05, an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.2. This petition filed by State for leave to appeal is barred by limitation of 92 days. The submission of the learned Counsel for the State is that judgment of acquittal was pronounced on 20-12-2004 and the application for obtaining certified copy was filed on 21-4-05. The certified copy was received on 26-4-05 and the Additional Public Prosecutor submitted proposal for filing appeal on 3-5-05 to District Magistrate, Morena and thereafter on 11-5-05 a proposal was forwarded to the Law Department by the District Magistrate Morena which was received in the Law Department on 17-5-05 and permission was granted on 27-5-05 by Law Deptt. Due to vacation in the High Court from 14-5-05 upto 19-6-05 the appeal was filed on 20-6-05. This application of the State is supported by the affidavit of Ashish Meshram, Sub-Divisional Officer Police, Jaura. Thereafter State has filed the affida...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »