Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
R.P. Gupta Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)MPHT412
ORDERManjusha Namjoshi, J.1. These revisions are under Section 397 read with Sections 401 and 482 of the Cr. P. C.2. Both the revisions have one subject-matter, hence they are bring decided by one order. A copy of the order be tagged with other file.3. The accused applicant is a General Manager, Vindhyachal Super Thermal Project/NTPC Ltd. Vindhya Nagar, District Sidhi. The respondent No. 2 had filed complaint under provisions of Sections 25-26 Inter State Migrant Workmen (RECS) Act, 1979 and the said complaint was registered by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Waidhan (Baidhan), Singrouli, District Sidhi. The Case No. is 65/2006. The other case is under Sections 23 and 24 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. The Case No. is 67/2006.4. The applicant had filed exemption applications in both the original cases before the lower Court under Section 205, Cr. P. C. for exemption from personal appearance. The trial Court by its orders dated 2-3-2006 kept the ...
Smt. Vimla Vs. Dinesh Kumar Sharma and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ816
S. Samvatsar, J.1. This appeal is filed by one of the claimants i.e. claimant No. 1 Shrimati Vimla challenging the award dated 1-12-2000 passed by III Additional Member Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No. 2/95 whereby the Claims Tribunal has passed an award of Rs. 2,30,000/- in favour of the present appellant and respondents 6, 7 and 8.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 4-12-1994 at about 6.00 in the evening deceased Chhote was going on his cycle. At that time, bus No. MP 07 B-944 which was coming from his back side dashed against him and Chhote died due to the injuries sustained by him. It is alleged that Chhote was earning Rs. 50/- per day. He was a labour aged 20 years. He was survived by appellant who is the widow, respondent No. 6 father, respondent No. 7 mother and respondent No. 8 younger sister. All the four persons filed an application for compensation.3. Claims Tribunal held that the deceased was 22 years of age and was earning Rs. 1500/- per ...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ramkunwar Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: II(2007)ACC779
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of MA Nos. 1605/2002, 1606/2002, 1821/2002, 1822/2002, 391/2003 and 21/2003 as all the appeals arising out of one accident. So far as MA Nos. 1605/2002, 1606/2002, 1821/2002 and 1822/2002 are concerned, they are arising out of claim case Nos. 42/2002, 46/2002, 47/2002 and 43/2002 vide award dated 25.7.2002 passed by MACT, Ujjain. So far as MA Nos. 391/2003 and 21/2003 are concerned, they are arising out of the claim case Nos. 96/2002 and 43/2002. In both these cases the prayer is for enhancement while in MA Nos. 1605/2002, 1606/2002, 1821/2002 and 1822/2002 the prayer is that the appellant/Insurance Company be exonerated.2. Short facts of the case are that a motor accident took place on 2.2.2001 by tractor bearing registration No. MP-13/KB/5828 and trolley bearing registration No. MP-13/HB/7526 which was owned by respondent No. 8 driven by respondent No.7 and insured with appellant. The case of claimants before the learned ...
Purshottam Khatri Vs. Cit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(MP)18; [2006]155TAXMAN520(MP)
This is an application filed by the assessee/applicant under section 261 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) for a certificate from the High Court that the appeal against the judgment of the Honble High Court dated 25-1-2006 in MA (IT) No. 114 of 2000 delivered under section 260A of the Act is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the assessee left India in 1968 and was employed in Muscat and Dubai till the year 1992-93 and returned to India thereafter. A search was carried out under section 132 in the premises of the assessee at Bhopal for a period of 13 days from 18-10-1996 to 30-10-1996. On the basis of the said search, an assessment was made under section 168BC read with section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment years 1992-93 to 1997-98. In the said assessment, the assessing officer found that the assessee was a person not ordinarily resident in India and had made several deposits in foreign currency in his NRE accounts in d...
Raj Kumar and Ashok Kumar S/O Moolchand Alias Goley JaIn Vs. Radhey Sh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ387
A.K. Shrivastava, J. 1. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs against the impugned judgment and decree dated 25.3.1992 passed by the 1st Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Tikamgarh in Civil Appeal No. 4-A/91, whereby the judgment and decree dated 12.12.1990 passed by 1st Civil Judge, Class-II, Tikamgarh has been reversed and set aside and the suit of the plaintiffs has been dismissed. 2. The plaintiffs/appellants filed a suit against the defendants/respondents praying therein that their father Moolchand was a tenant of the suit shop owned by Municipality, Tikamgarh and after the death of their father on 13.12.1985, being sons they inherited the tenancy right and by holding over the tenancy right they are tenants of defendant No. 2. The plaintiffs further prayed that defendant No. 1/respondent No. 1 be directed to deliver possession of the suit shop to them. 3. According to the plaint averments the suit shop was taken by Moolchand, who was father of the plai...
Purshottam Khatri Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: [2007]290ITR277(MP)
A.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. This is an application filed by the assessee/applicant under Section 261 of the IT Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') for a certificate from the High Court that the appeal against the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court dt. 25th Jan., 2006 in MA (IT) No. 114 of 2000 [reported as CIT v. Purshottam Khatri (2006) 203 CTR (MP) 1.] delivered under Section 260A of the Act is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the assessee left India in 1968 and was employed in Muscat and Dubai till the year 1992-93 and returned to India thereafter. A search was carried out under Section 132 in the premises of the assessee at Bhopal for a period of 13 days from 18th Oct., 1996 to 30th Oct., 1996. On the basis of the said search, an assessment was made under Section 168BC read with Section 143(3) of the Act for the asst. yrs. 1992-93 to 1997-98. In the said assessment, the AO found that the assessee was a person not ordinarily resident in India and...
Kailashi Vs. Smt. Bharosi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)MPLJ477
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. Petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by a order dated 23rd March 2006 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Sheopur, competent authority under Section 122 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993. By the aforesaid order, election of the petitioner to the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Zaida, thesil Sheopur has been quashed and directions have been given for taking further action in the matter.2. Facts in brief are that elections to the office of Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Zaida tehsil Sheopur took place on 16th January 2005. Counting of votes was held on 28th January 2005 and after counting petitioner and the respondent No. 1, Smt. Bharosi Bai received equal number of votes, i.e., 244 (two hundred and forty four) votes each. Two applications were filed on behalf of the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 before the Returning Officer, On behalf of the petitioner, application was filed vide Annexure P/2 for count...
Bherulal and ors. Vs. Mohd. Jamil and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPLJ597
ORDERW.A. Shah, J.1. The petitioners have filed this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('Code' hereafter) as they are aggrieved by the order dated 7-3-2006 passed by learned Xllth Civil Judge, Class-I, Indore, in Civil Execution Case No. 38-A/82x2000, where by the application of the petitioners to challenge the execution application as barred by limitation has been rejected.The present petitions arises out of the following facts:2. The deceased Mohammad Jamil had filed a Civil Suit No. 38-A/82 against deceased Bherulal for ejectment and possession of the disputed house in 1982. In the said suit deceased Bherulal was proceeded ex parte and the suit was decreed ex parte on 27-7-1982. An application for execution of the said decree was filed on 22-6-2000. Meanwhile on behalf of the deceased/defendant Misc. Judicial Case No. 21/84 for setting aside the said decree under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code was filed on 14-12-1984 and the same was dismissed on 25-11-1989. Ag...
State of M.P. and ors. Vs. Manubai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC205
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the non-applicant/State under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award, dated 17.4.2002, passed by learned 1st Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shajapur in Claim Case No. 107 of 2001. By impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 2,79,000 to the claimants for the death of one Kalu Ram. According to State i.e., non-applicant in the Tribunal, the impugned award is had in law and hence, the same is liable to be set aside. So, the short question that arises for consideration is, whether Tribunal was justified in awarding sum of Rs. 2,79,000 to the claimants on the facts found?2. Heard Mr. S.D. Bohra, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the appellant-State and Mr. M. Jain, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4.3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused record of the case, I am inclined to dismiss the appeal, callingno interference in the impugned award...
Govinda and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ287
A.K. Gohil, J.1. In this appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, appellants have challenged the judgment of their conviction under Sections 302/34, 325/34 and 323 of IPC for life imprisonment, three years' R.I. and six months' R.I. respectively passed by Sessions Judge, Guna in Sessions Trial No. 207/91 for committing the murder of one Bhagchand and causing injuries to Hariram and Suraj.2. Facts giving rise to this appeal as per prosecution story are that accused persons and the complainant belong to Dhimar community and reside in 'Navin' Colony situated at Bajrangarh near '20 Bhuji Mataji'. Said colony has been established for rehabilitating the sufferers of submergence due to construction of Gopi Krishna Sagar Dam. The incident took place two days after 'Holi'. At about 4 PM, people were going to house to house in 'Navin' Colony for breaking 'Dauji'. 'Dauji' is a custom which is celebrated in the said community after 'Holi' festival. At this occasion village...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »