Madhya Pradesh Court August 2008 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.
Rakesh Dharamdas Rai Vs. Smt. Lata @ Shakuntala Rai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT196
U.C. Maheshwari, J.1. This appeal is directed by the petitioner husband under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in short 'the Act', being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 11-3-05 passed by the District Judge, Tikamgarh in Hindu Marriage Case No. 76-A/2003 whereby his petition filed against respondent-wife under Sections 13(1)(i a) and 13(1A)(ii) of the Act for decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and of non-compliance the decree for restitution of conjugal rights has been allowed for judicial separation under Section 10 of the Act, contrary to the prayer made in the petition.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that the appellant herein filed the aforesaid petition contending that on 18-6-1998 he got married with the respondent in accordance with rites and rituals of the Hindu Community. Then the appellant was educated unemployed person while the respondent being Shiksha Karmi in education department was earning Rs. 3200/- per month. Initially...
Sadhan Nayak @ Deepak Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2008
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT18
Sushma Shrivastava, J.1. Appellant has preferred this appeal challenging his conviction and order of sentence passed by IXlh Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T. No. 228/98, decided on 27-10-99.2. Appellant has been convicted under Sections 394/397, 302 of IPC and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default Rigorous Imprisonment for three months, and to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default Rigorous Imprisonment for three months, for the respective offences by the impugned judgment. The sentences were to run concurrently.3. According to prosecution, on 13-5-98 about 9 O'clock in the morning, complainant Sarla Rao left for her office leaving her servant named Vijay at her House No. 542, Arvind Bihar, Bag Sevaniya, Bhopal. When she came back about 7 o'clock in the evening, she did not find her servant Vijay, then she opened the door of her house by duplicate key. On going inside the house, she found that her things were ly...
Kaptan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT228
A.P. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal is directed by the appellant against judgment of conviction and sentence dated 2-3-2002 passed by VI Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 248/2001, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and under Section 376 of IPC, sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs. 3,000/- with default stipulations.2. According to the prosecution, the facts of the case are that a report (Exh. P-l) was lodged by the complainant Ramkali (P.W. 1), mother of the prosecutrix (P.W. 2) at Police Station Padav that after taking food at about 9 in the night while she got slept her daughter was reading near her. When she woke up in the night she found that her daughter was not in the house. She enquired from Lakhan, Ramesh and Deepak, who were also residing in the same locality. When she was searching her dau...
Mujeeb HusaIn @ Sonu Vs. Ismail S/O Noorbaksh Musalman and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT434
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by judgment dated 8-11-06 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), Neemuch in Criminal Appeal No. 180/05, whereby the judgment dated 16-9-05 passed in Criminal Case No. 622/03, whereby the petitioner was convicted under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, (which shall be referred hereinafter as 'an Act') and was sentenced for RI for a period of one year with fine of Rs. 5,000/- was modified and the sentence of RI was set aside with a direction to pay a fine of Rs. 40,000/- and in case of default the petitioner shall be sent to jail for a period of six months, the present petition has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 filed a complaint alleging that petitioner was in need of money in connection of his business, therefore, respondent No. 1 gave a sum of Rs. 37,000/- to the petitioner as loan on 5-2-2003. Further case of the respondent No. 1 was that petitioner gave post dated cheques of Rs. 15,000/...
Rajesh Gupta Vs. Bsnl (Personnel-i Section) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR309]; 2008(4)MPHT532
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. The petitioner is holding the post of General Manger (Telecom) in the respondent Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (for short 'BSNL'). He has been transferred from Ujjain (MP Circle) to Shilong (NE-1 Circle) vide order dated 30-06-08 (Annexure P-1) and relieved vide order dated 30-06-08 (Annexure P-2A). On 30-06-08 itself the third respondent who was posted in place of petitioner assumed the charge of the post held by the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed a representation (Annexure P-2) and has filed this petition.2. According to the petitioner he has been transferred only to accommodate the third respondent. He stated that the third respondent who was posted at Shajapur was promoted and was posted at Jabalpur but he got his posting at Jabalpur cancelled and managed his posting at Ujjain. He alleges mala fides in his transfer on the ground that on 30-06-08 the impugned transfer order was issued from Delhi. On 30-06-08 itself he has been ordered to...
Manu Bhai Tripathi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: AIR2008MP309; 2009(1)MPHT9
A.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The petitioner who is a resident of Sagar Cantonment has filed this writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation challenging the preparation of final electoral rolls of the Sagar Cantonment for elections to the Sagar Cantonment Board.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the Cantonments Act, 1924 was replaced by the new Cantonments Act, 2006 (for short, 'the 2006 Act') by Parliament. The 2006 Act was brought into force by notification dated 18-12-2006. Under Section 31 of the 2006 Act, the Central Government made and notified on 21-8-2007 the Cantonment Electoral Rules, 2007 (for short 'the 2007 Rules'). Thereafter the Sagar Cantonment Board undertook the demarcation of wards in Sagar Cantonment in accordance with the 2007 Rules. The petitioner filed his objection to the revision of the wards in the Sagar Cantonment stating that there have been lot of encroachments resulting in increase of number of voters and that the ericroachers have no right to be included in...
Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Ansaldo Energia, S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: AIR2008MP328
Dipak Misra, J.1. The spinal and centroidal issue that has spiralled to this Court for the purpose of adjudication in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Arts. 226/227 of the Constitution of India is whether the Additional District Judge has the inherent jurisdiction to hear the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the 1996 Act') in view of the language employed under Sections 2(1)(e) and 42 of the said enactment or it is the District Judge alone who has the jurisdiction to deal with the lis.2. The facts which are absolutely imperative to be exposited for the purpose of adjudication of the controversy are that four agreements were signed between the petitioners, namely, Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board and Madhya Pradesh Power Generation Company Limited and the respondents on the basis of a letter of intent issued in favour of the respondent No. 1 on 11-5-1999. In pursuance of the execution of the agreement, the respo...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gei Engineering Ltd. (Now Gei Hamon Ind ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: [2009]310ITR112(MP)
Dipak Misra, J.1. The present appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act'), was admitted on the following substantial question of law:Whether the Tribunal has erred in holding that the adjustments (disallowance) made by the Assessing Officer by treating the late delivery damages of Rs. 58,79,839 and penal interest of Rs. 14,69,905 as contingent liabilities were not within the scope of prima facie adjustments under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?2. The facts leading to filing of this appeal are that the assessee-respondent filed its return of income for the assessment year 1997-98 on November 28, 1997, declaring its total income of Rs. 79,58,855. Audit reports as per Section 44AB of the Income-tax Act and as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, were filed along with the return of income. The return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act as per the intimation dated November 17, 1998, which was served on the ass...
Mohan Mahavar and ors. and Vijay Kumar Mahavar and anr. Vs. Union of I ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT407
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The petitioners in these two writ petitions are all residents of different wards of the Jabalpur Cantonment and they have filed these writ petitions as Public Interest Litigations challenging the electoral rolls notified on 3-1-2008 for elections to the Jabalpur Cantonment Board.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the Cantonments Act, 1924 was replaced by a new Cantonments Act, 2006 (for short 'the 2006 Act') by Parliament. The 2006 Act was brought into force by notification dated 18-12-2006. Under Section 31 of the 2006 Act, the Central Government made and notified on 21-8-2007 the Cantonment Electoral Rules, 2007 (for short 'the 2007 Rules'). Thereafter, the preliminary electoral rolls of the Jabalpur Cantonment were published on 20-11-2007 inviting claims and objections and the final electoral rolls of the Jabalpur Cantonment were published on 3-1 -2008. Aggrieved, the petitioners have filed these two writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution....
Tapa Traders Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT357
ORDERS.K. Gangele, J.1. These petitions, W.P. No. 1348/05, Tapa Traders, Gwalior v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Gwalior; W.P No. 2839/05, R.R. Patel v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Guna and Anr.; W.P. No. 1021/05, Ram Avatar v. Kishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Morena; W.P. No. 1266/05, Meera Stores, Morena v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Morena and W.P. No. 1986/05, Kapoor Chand Jain v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Bhind, are inter-linked and have been taken up together for disposal because a common question of law is involved with regard to competence of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti to impose tax on Tobacco Choor and similar form of Tobacco.2. The facts narrated in Writ Petition No. 1348/05 have been taken into consideration in to this order.3. The petitioners are in business of selling Tobacco Choor. The aforesaid Tobacco Choor has been brought by the petitioners for sale from out side of the State. As per petitioners it is a processed product, hence the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti has no authority and power to im...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »