Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-24-1984
Reported in : 1987(11)ECC296; 1987(13)LC51(MP); 1985(19)ELT329(MP)
P.D. Mulye, J.1. The petitioner No. 1, Madhumilan Syntex Private Ltd. which is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and of whom petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director owns a factory at Biora wherein they manufacture spun yarn. This product is covered by Item 18, Schedule 1 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.2. According to the petitioners in the manufacture of their product, they use as raw material cellulosic fibre and non-cellulosic waste. By blending and processing of these raw materials, the final products spun yarn is produced. Therefore, the product falls in para (i) of Item 18-III of the First Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act. Further according to the petitioners their product does not contain any man-made fibre of non cellulosic origin and, therefore, they have been classifying the product by paying the duty in accordance with the Tariff Item 18-III(i) of the said Act.3. That respondent No. 4 by a demand notice dated 7th February, 1984 (Annex...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-24-1984
Reported in : 1988(15)ECC238; 1987(12)LC1028(MP); 1985(19)ELT35(MP)
P.D. Mulye, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Hind Syntex Ltd., which is a Company duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956, which has a factory in village Bibrod, district Dewas, where they are engaged in the manufacture of manmade yarns with different blends such as cellulosic spun fibre and non-cellulosic polyester waste. According to the petitioner the raw material for the above blended yarn is cellulosic fibre and non-cellulosic polyester waste; that the petitioner has been importing in India the non-cellulosic polyester waste as polyester waste through the Customs Department and that the petitioners have purchased the same polyester waste from the Indian Market. Further according to the petitioners, in order to keep the Industry running the petitioners decided to use non-cellulosic waste, the cost of which is considerably less than that on non-cellulosic fibre and thus started manufacturing yarn from the above waste by blending the same with cellulosic fibre by describing the product...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-18-1984
Reported in : AIR1985MP88
K.K. Verma, J. 1. This is defendants' appeal from a reversing decree dt. 2-9-1974 passed by the Additional District Judge, Guna, in Civil Appeal No. 86 of 1979 arising out of the decree dt. 11-7-69 of the Civil Judge Class II, Mungaoli, whereby the respondent's suit (C.S. No. 47-A/66 instituted on 4-7-66) for a mandatory injunction for closure of the 'nikas', 'mori' and 'Khidki' of the appellants newly constructed latrine was dismissed.2. The following facts were admitted in the written statement.There is a 3' X 31/2' wide lane running east-west between the respondent's house to its north and the appellants' house to the south of the said lane at Athaipura Ward No. 7 in the town of Mungaoli. With the sanction of the Municipal Committee in 1964 the appellants opened a door in their house in the northern wing which is situated adjacent to, and along, the aforementioned lane. In 1965 the appellants applied to the Municipal Committee Mungaoli for sanction to construct a latrine in the nort...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-09-1984
Reported in : 1985MPLJ149
C. P. SEN, J.1. This opinion shall also govern Civil Revision No. 1784 of 1983 between the same parties. Both these revisions arise out of the same suit. The following question has been referred by the learned Single Judge for opinion of this Bench :'Whether in view of the deletion of Sub-rule (m) of Rule 1 of Order 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the Amending Act No. 104 of 1976, an appeal is competent under Order 43. Rule 1-A, particularly when there is a bar to appeal under Section 96(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure?'2. The parties are real brothers. Their father Dhannalal died in the year 1964 leaving behind his widow Smt. Reotibai and five sons, including the applicant and non-applicant. By agreement dated 29-1-1980. the legal representatives of Dhannalal, referred the dispute regarding the property left by the deceased to Panchas. However, due to certain opposition the Panchas could not give their award and closed the proceeding. The non-applicant then filed civil suit for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-27-1984
Reported in : AIR1985MP42; 1985MPLJ32
Oza, Ag. C.J.1. The three appeals Nos. 4, 5 and 7, all of 1983, arise out of a composite order passed by Company Judge Hon'ble Shri Justice J.S. Verma, by his order dated 3rd Oct. 1983 in Company Petition No. 5 of 1981. This order disposes of a prayer under Section 397 of the Companies Act and Sections 398 and 155 of the Companies Act. The prayer under Section 397 was rejected and against this the present appeal is No. 4 of 1983. Prayer under Section 398 has been partly allowed and, therefore, appeal No. 7 of 1983 is preferred against that part of the order and as the prayer under Section 155 was rejected, an appeal is preferred which is appeal No. 5 of 1983.2. In all these three appeals the question of maintainability of the appeals arises in view of the abolition of Letters Patent Appeals in Clause 10 by the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Letters Patent Appeals Samapti) Adhiniyam, 1981, passed by the State Legislature and which received the assent of the President on 21st June 1981...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-20-1984
Reported in : 1984CriLJ975
ORDERC.P. Sen, J.1. Under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners are seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order of the District Magistrate. Chhatarpur, dated 7-12-1981 attaching the properties of the petitioners under Section 14 of M.P. Dakaiti Aur Vyapaharan Pra-bhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981, (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam).2. Petitioner No. 1 Gorelal is the husband of petitioner No. 2 Mannubai and father of petitioners Nos. 3 and 4 Laxmiprasad and Deviprasad. They constitute a joint Hindu family and residing in house No. 25 on Gandhi Road, Chhatarpur. They own Gupta Lodge and New Gupta Lodge near bus-stand, Chhatarpur. They also own some agricultural land. Gupta Lodge is run in partnership between petitioners 1 and 3 while New Gupta Lodge is in partnership between petitioners 2 and 4. The petitioners 1 and 2 settled down at Chhatarpur in the year 1948-49 and they had a modest beginning by running a grocery shop in the year 1951 and then they started a sw...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-19-1984
Reported in : (1985)44CTR(MP)85
ORDERBy the Court - The Tribunal, Indore Bench, has made this reference under section 27(1) of the WT Act, 1957 (the Act) to this court for its opinion on the following question of law :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the IAC had jurisdiction to impose penalty under s. 18(1)(c) on 24-3-1977 after the amendment of s. 18(3) of the WT Act by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 and2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, once the IAC had imposed composite penalties for concealment detected by the WTO and enhanced by the ACC in the value of shares and jewellery on estimates, the order was bad even relating to the part which had been originally detected by the WTO and, therefore, could not be maintained qua that part ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference, in brief, thus : For the asst. yrs. 1973-74 and 1974-75, on reference by the WTO to the IAC under s. 18(3) of the Act, penalties at Rs. 1,80,000 and Rs. 5,000, respect...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-12-1984
Reported in : 1(1985)ACC336
P.C. Pathak, J.1. This appeal, under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act,) is directed against an award dated 15-12-1981, passed by Shri V.D. Bajpai, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Seoni, in Motor Claims Case No. 18 of 1981, wereby the appellant-claimant prays for enhancement of compensation against the respondents.2. The appellant filed an application under Section 110-A of the Act for compensation of Rs. 1,04,847/- under different heads, out of which the Tribunal accepted the claim for Rs. 6,200/- only together with interest @ 6% from the dated of application till realisation, against the respondents.3. The facts giving rise to the claim are that on 23-5-1980, at about 1.30 p.m., the appellant's truck MPC 474, loaded with wooden logs, was coming on the National Highway from Khawasa towards Seoni and, at the relevant time, the truck was ascending Kurai Valley, An other truck MPG 2192, owned by respondent No. 1 and driven by respondent No....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-28-1984
Reported in : [1985]59STC191(MP)
P.D. Mulye, J. 1. The Board of Revenue, at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, has made this reference to this Court under Section 44 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 to answer the following question of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal passed on 22nd December, 1975:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the turnover of charcoal worth Rs. 67,000 for the period 1st April, 1959 to 14th August, 1962 as not liable to tax in spite of the fact that deduction was not allowable on these sales either under Section 2(r)(ii) or under Section 2(r)(iv) as they stood during the relevant period ?2. The statement of the case as given out by the Board in the said reference may be stated in brief thus: The respondent M/s. Arunchand Charandas Chabra, deals in firewood and charcoal at Indore. He was assessed to sales tax for the period from 1st April, 1959 to. 31st March, 1967 under Section 18(6) of the said Act by the Assis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-28-1984
Reported in : 1985CriLJ1561
ORDERB.C. Varma, J.1. This application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for release of the applicants on bail in the event of their arrest has been made in these circumstances:A Truck No. B.H.V. 7680 loaded with rice bags was found on way between Pathalgaon and Jashpurnagar in Raigarh district. The Additional Superintendent of Police stopped that truck, checked it and found that the rice was being transported for sale but without selling to the Purchase Officer the requisite quantity of rice in accordance with Clause 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1960. The truck was seized. The driver and the cleaner were arrested. Chetandas, the applicant No. 2, is a licensed dealer in foodgrain. Rice was being sent to Jashpurnagar. After seizure, he applied for placing the rice under his Suprudnama and that was done. The driver and the Khaiasi working on the truck have been released on bail. The applicants could not be arrested and it is the allegation agai...
Tag this Judgment!