Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Pavitra Bai and ors. Vs. Kantilal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2712
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (for brevity hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against an award dated 29.1.2003 passed by Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, District Dewas in Case No. 2/WCF of 2002. By impugned award, the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation (Labour Court), District Dewas has partly allowed the application made by claimants-appellants under Section 10 of the Act and awarded compensation of Rs. 3,17,685 to the claimants for the death of one Nand Kishore. However, while passing the award, the Commissioner exonerated the insurance company, non-applicant No. 2/respondent No. 2 from the liability arising out of the accident. It is against this award, the claimants have filed this appeal under Section 30 of the Act. So, the question that arises for consideration in this appeal is: whether Commissioner was justified in awarding a total compensation of Rs. 3,17,685 to the claimants for death of...
Nalini and ors. Vs. Mukhtyarsingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ906
R.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. This is a claimants' appeal against the judgment and award dated 27.4.2001 in Claim Case No. 17 of 2000 passed by the Twelfth M.A.C.T., Indore.The claimants are the young widow, younger brother, father and mother of one Devendra Sharma, a Mechanical Engineer, having passed B.E. in the first class. On 14.5.1996, when he was driving a car, the truck bearing registration No. MP 09-KA 3862 (of which respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are respectively the driver, owner and insurer) which was being driven in a negligent manner, dashed against the said car and Devendra Sharma sustained serious injuries. He died on account of the injuries sustained in the said accident after 6 days. Feeling aggrieved, the claimants filed the said claim petition claiming a compensation of Rs. 73,00,000.2. After appreciating the evidence, the Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 27.4.2001 allowed the claim in part. It held that the accident occurred due to negligence of the driver of the truc...
H.L. Taneja Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2006
Reported in: [2008]300ITR384(MP)
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In this petition, petitioner is assailing the assessment made under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (for short the 'Scheme') as per order (P/4), dt. 19th Feb., 1999.2. Precisely the submission of the petitioner in this petition is that the disputed income has been worked out on the basis of disputed tax which does not include levy of additional tax under Section 141(2)(sic) of the IT Act, 1961.3. Petitioner has submitted that for the asst. yrs. 1994-95 and 1995-96 disputed income was worked out. Petitioner filed declaration under Section 89 r/w Section 88 of the Finance Act, 1998 for settlement of tax payable to the respondent No. 1. The total tax payable on the aforesaid amount was worked out to Rs. 2,13,310. Respondent No. 1 did not accept the aforesaid figure and determined the tax payable under Section 89 of the Finance Act, 1998 at Rs. 3,03,134. For doing so, the respondent No. 1 took into consideration the amount of the additional tax payable which was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›