Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(3)MPHT270
ORDERR.S. Jha, J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of W.P. No. 13957/2008 and W.P. No. 3304/2009 as the relief sought by the petitioners in both these petitions are identical.2. The petitioners, who are all resident of Village Siddhikhurd, Tehsil Singroli, District Sidhi, have challenged the notifications dated 8-8-2006 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'); 10-8-2007 issued under Section 6 of the Act; and 23-6-2008 issued under Section 17(1)(3) of the Act.3. The case of the petitioners, before this Court, is that the respondent authorities, with a view to set up the Sasan Ultra Mega Power Project, have issued the aforesaid notifications wherein, apart from the land of other villages, 427.08 hectares of land of Village Siddhikhurd is sought to be acquired including about 25 acres of land belonging to the petitioners.4. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the impugned notifications are contrary t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP169
Dipak Misra, J.1. Questioning the defensibility and substantiality of the order dated 14-8-2007 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 14605/ 2006, the present intra-Court appeal has been preferred under Section 2(1) of the M. P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005. The writ appeal was heard by a Division Bench which referred to the facts in issue, the provisions contained in the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (for short 'the Act') especially Section 50 of the said enactment, the stand and stance taken by the contesting parties and the interveners, the view expressed by the learned single Judge and the interpretation placed by him on the proviso added to Sub-section (4) of Section 50 of the Act by the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh (Sansodhan) Adhiniyam, 2004 on 29-12-2004, the interpretation sought to be placed by the learned senior counsel appearing for the Indore Development Authority (in short 'the Authority') and the proponemen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(4)MPHT453
ORDERViney Mittal, J. 1. This issue projected for determination before this Court is:2. Whether for the purpose of carrying on the business of producing and selling of Bt cotton hybrid seeds, a permission from the Director of Agriculture of the State Government or from the State Biotechnology Co-ordination Committee (SBCC) is required ?3. The facts leading to the aforesaid question may be noticed4. The petitioner-Seeds Association of Madhya Pradesh, Indore (hereinafter referred to as 'petitioner-Association'), is a society registered under the provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860, and is an association of persons involved in the business of the manufacture/production and sale of the seeds. Members of the petitioner-Association are also involved in the manufacture of Bt cotton hybrid seeds variety, which is a hybrid variety of seeds developed through gene transfer technology. According to the petitioner-Association, its members engaged in the dealings of aforesaid Bt cotton hy...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT198
R.C. Mishra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 31-3-2001 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Seoni in S.T. No. 2/2000 whereby each one of the appellants was convicted and sentenced as under:-----------------------------------------------------------------Convicted under Section Sentenced to-----------------------------------------------------------------447 of the Indian Penal Code pay a fine of Rs. 300/-.(for brevity 'the Code')-----------------------------------------------------------------323 of the Code undergo S.I. for two monthsand to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-and in default, to suffer SI for15 days.-----------------------------------------------------------------In addition, the appellant No. 2 Chainsingh also stands convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and to pay fine of Rs. 300/- and in default, to suffer SI for 15 days.2. Prosecution story, in short, may be na...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (2010)228CTR(MP)497; [2009]310ITR341(MP)
Dipak Misra, J.1. Regard being had to the similarity of the substantial question of law involved in these appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (or brevity 'the Act'), they were heard analogously and are being disposed of by a singular order. For the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts in MAIT No. 58 of 2004 are adumbrated herein.2. In these appeals, the following substantial question of law is involved:Whether the Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to interest even on the amount of interest allowed or allowable under Section 244A when Section 244A of the Act provides for payment of simple interest only?3. The assessee, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, filed its return declaring a total income of Rs. 10,48,96,320. Thereafter, a revised return was filed declaring a total income of Rs. 8,64,95,970 on February 4,1997. The return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) and the total income was finally determin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [2009]310ITR152(MP)
Deepak Misra, J.1. This batch of appeals preferred by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act'), was admitted on different substantial questions of law and at the time of hearing, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue as well as the assessees fairly stated that the questions should be recast as follows:(a) Whether the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the will dated June 2, 1992, was genuine in view of the certificate of probate obtained from the court of learned Additional District Judge, Katni, vide order dated March 15, 1996, and, therefore, the properties bequeathed under the will belong to the late L.P. Khanna?(b) Whether the Tribunal is justified in dislodging the finding of the Assessing Officer and that of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the additions made by the Assessing Officer that late L.P. Khanna, father of C.K. Khanna, the assessee, the income that was bequeathed under the will actually belongs to C.K. Khanna...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP84; 2009(40)PTC210(MP)
Dipak Misra, J.1. In this intra-court appeal, the defensibility and legal tenability of the order dated 5-4-2007 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 1443 of 2007 is called in question.2. The facts which are imperative to be uncurtained are that the respondent invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the propriety of the order dated 2-1-2007, Annex.P-21, to the writ petition passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bhopal in R.C.S. No. 127 of 2005 whereby he had rejected the report of the Commissioner dated 6-12-2006 appointed for valuation of the trade mark and prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the same. Additionally, it was prayed that a command should be issued to the trial Court to take into account the report for preparing the final decree.3. As discernible from the material documents brought on record and the asseverations setforth in the writ petition, the respondent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT123
P.K. Jaiswal, J.1. This second appeal is filed by the plaintiffs/appellants against the judgment and decree dated 1-9-1999 passed by the First Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Shivpuri in Civil Appeal No. 15-A/97, whereby learned Additional District Judge affirmed the judgment and decree dated 2-2-1996 passed by Civil Judge, Class II, Shivpuri in Civil Suit No. 1-A/81, by which Trial Court dismissed the suit of the appellants.2. On 20-1-2004, this appeal was admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law:(1) Whether Nathua had right to mortgage the suit property in favour of respondent No. 1-Bank, when there was a decree for specific performance against him? and(2) Whether the respondent No. 1 has acquired title to the suit property as he has purchased the suit property in the auction?3. On 26-6-2007, this Court framed following additional substantial questions of law:(i) Whether attestation of the document by a witness without proof regarding the kno...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT228
R.S. Jha, J.1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the tenant against whom a judgment and decree of eviction have been passed by the Fourth Civil Judge, Class-II, Sagar on 1-5-2003 in Civil Suit No. 103-A/2001 and affirmed by the First Appellate Court, Sagar, by the judgment and decree dated 31-3-2005 passed in Civil Appeal No. 58-A/2004.2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, are that the appellant/defendant was inducted as tenant in part of house No. 308 on 1-7-1988 on Rs. 400/- per month as rent by the husband of respondent/plaintiff Smt. Usha Mukhariya. Subsequently, the respondent/plaintiff gave a notice of eviction to the appellant/defendant on the ground of arrears of rent and bonafide requirement of the accommodation by the respondent/plaintiff for non-residential purpose of her son. As the notice went unreplied, a suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking eviction on the grounds mentioned under Sections 12(1)(a) and 12(1)(f) of the Madhya Pra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT88
S.L. Kochar, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 156 of the Electricity Act 2003 (For short 'the Act') read with Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (For short 'the Code') against the judgment dated 15-12-07 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Special Judge, Biaora District Rajgarh) in Special Case No. 267/06, thereby holding the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 135 of the Act, convicted and sentenced him to pay Rs. 8,445/- fine and in default of payment of fine to suffer additional S.I. for six months and also fixed civil liability as per provision under Section 154(5) of the Act.2. On inspection by the Junior Engineer Shri D.L. Koshtha (CW-1) of M.P. Electricity Supply Company accompanied by helper Motilal on 16-02-06, found that near the bank of Parvati river in village Kanarkhedi, the accused was irrigating his field by 5 HP Motor Pump by taking electricity directly from Lower Tension line. Appellant had not taken any regular e...
Tag this Judgment!