Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-14-1999
Reported in : 2000(3)MPHT197
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Considering different factual matrix in relation to effect and impact of non-intimation by the owner-insured to the insurer at the time of transfer of a motor vehicle as required under Section 103A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the resultant liability of the insurance company in such a factual foundation and noticing cleavage of opinion in Nana Bai and Ors. v. Ishaque Khan and Ors., 1995 ACJ 292, Nagindas and Anr. v. Nasir Ali and Ors., 1997 ACJ 1093 and United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Shamsuddin and 11 Ors. (M.A. No. 378 of 1989) on one hand and Sabir Hussain v. Maya Bai and Ors., 1997 ACJ 1258 on the other, a Division Bench of this Court in M.A. No. 446 of 1997 and other connected matters thought it appropriate that the matter required to be decided by a larger Bench. In M.A. No. 192 of 1996 another Division Bench noticing the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Balwant Singh v. Jhunnubai and Ors., ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : May-07-1999
Reported in : 1999(2)MPLJ307
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed under Section 384 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter called 'the Act') against the order dated 31-1-1997 of Additional District Judge, Dindori, District Mandla, passed on a petition under Section 372 of the Act, directing issue of succession certificate of late Somnath in favour of respondents 1 to 3, in their capacity as his widow/daughter and son respectively to the extent of l/3rd share each. The petition claiming succession certificate moved by the appellants and respondent No. 4 was dismissed. The appellants and respondent No. 4 had claimed as widow and daughters and son of the late Shri Somnath Gond. Respondents 1 to 3 had also claimed in the same capacity. The respondents 1 to 3 succeeded. Some service benefits were payable to the heirs of the deceased Somnath. The appellants claimed that they belong to Gond tribe who follow custom of polygamy and there was also custom of marriage by wearing bangles (Chudi system) by the lad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : May-04-1999
Reported in : AIR2000MP194; 2000(2)MPHT112
Dipak Misra, J. 1. Coal is sometimes called black diamond, of course, contextu-ally. Euphemistically it is also called 'Dark Diamond'. Archeological evidence indicates that coal was burnt in funeral pyres during the Bronz Age (3000-4000). Great philosopher and thinker Aristotle refers to coal in his book 'Mateorology'. In the modern context the term 'coal' has gained immense significance and importance as far as industrial world is concerned. Classification is sometimes viewed as a controversy in perpetuity for some reason or the other. It creates a stir in the atmosphere and gathers momentum to knock at the doors of justice for proper estimation. The authorities deal with the coal as their monopoly by prescribing grades and fixing the rates as they feel just but the dissatisfaction among the consumers arises because they feel that injury has been caused to justice which requires to be remedied by the Courts.2. The moot question that arises for consideration in this batch of writ appli...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : May-05-1999
Reported in : 1999(2)MPLJ649
ORDERA.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal directed against judgment dated 22-1-1999 passed by the learned single Judge in W. P. No. 2495 of 1998, whereby the petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed.2. In order to dispose of this appeal, it is relevant to mention a few facts of the case. The appellant/petitioner filed writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and prayed for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents 2 and 3 in creating hindrance in sale of lottery tickets of the Royal Government of Bhutan in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner/appellant is the Manager of M/s Surya Enterprises, which is the distributors of lotteries of Royal Government of Bhutan. It is alleged that an agreement was entered into between the Government of India and the Government of Bhutan on 29-2-1995 on Trade and Commerce between the Royal Government of Bhutan and the Government of Republic of India. Article-I of the agreement contemplates free tra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-05-1999
Reported in : II(1999)DMC489
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Despite stringent laws and provisions for deter- rent punishments in them, crimes against women could not be contained because of absence of change in attitude of society towards women and the curse of age-old vicious customs.2. In this case, the victim is a graduate married young girl Sushma Gupta who was found dead with extensive burns all over her body and eight injuries on her person. She has left behind her child Dheeraj, only aged about one year at the time of her death.3. Deceased Sushma was daughter of Amarnath Gupta (P.W. 4) who is an Advocate at Allahabad. Ravi Gupta and Rajesh Gupta (P.W. 11) are her brothers. Nirmala (P.W. 5), Manjula (P.W. 6) and Sarla (P.W. 14) are her sisters. Nathulal Gupta (P.W. 15) is the husband of Sarla and is brother-in-law of the deceased.4. Sushma was married to Pankaj Gupta (appellant No. 2) on 2nd of February, 1987. He is son of Ram Vishnu Gupta (appellant No. 1) who is an Advocate practising at Shahdol. Accused-appella...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-07-1999
Reported in : 2000(2)MPHT455
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This revision under Section 19 of the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) has been preferred against the award of the Arbitration Tribunal dated 7-4-1997 whereby the claim preferred by the appellant/contractor has been dismissed in toto and the counter-claim preferred by the Irrigation Department through its Engineer and the State has been allowed by directing the contractor to pay a sum of Rs. 1,62,637/- (inclusive of interest) due upto the date of filing of claim i.e. 26-11-1996 and further interest at the contractual rate from 26-11-1996 on the outstanding amount of loan advanced in the sum of Rs. 94,658/-.2. The facts not in dispute are that the applicant/contractor was awarded work for excavation of Chachai Distributary from Ch. 95 to Ch. 225 as part of the Bansagar Multipurpose River Valley Project. The contractor was sanctioned a total loan of Rs. 5 lacs for purchase of machinery which was an e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-27-1999
Reported in : [2000]118STC52(MP)
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashing the impugned review order dated March 3, 1992 (annexure F) and also the notice of demand dated May 1, 1992 (annexure G) and also praying for restoration of the order dated October 25, 1991 (annexure C) which was passed by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P., Indore, following the decision of Board of Revenue dated August 27, 1990 (annexure D).2. In short the case of the petitioner in this petition is that the petitioner has set up an oil mill at Bhikangaon which was a new industrial unit, The petitioner was exempted from payment of entry tax for the period of 5 years from the date of first purchase of oil-seeds and other raw materials for consumption in the manufacture of oil and oil-cake. The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Khargone (respondent No. 2) passed an assessment order under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (for short 'th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-05-1999
Reported in : [2000]244ITR845(MP)
Dipak Misra, J. 1. The justifiability of the action of the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation) and the Commissioner of Income-tax, respondents Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, herein, requisitioning the bank draft of the petitioner in exercise of power under Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on December 14, 1996, is called in question in the present writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, a partnership firm.2. The essential facts which require narration for the present litigation are that the petitioner firm is engaged in the business of executing various kinds of work, and contract operation of quarrying of sand on lease basis from the Government of Madhya Pradesh. As set forth in the petition, the partnership-firm submitted earnest money of Rs. 72,60,000 (seventy two lakhs sixty thousand only) in a joint venture along with others with theMadhya Pradesh Matsya Vikas Nigam Limited (her...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : May-06-1999
Reported in : AIR1999MP246
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. The petitioners have by this petition raised a very interesting question whether the legal profession is a commercial activity or it is a trade or business. Before we attempt to answer this question, it would be relevant to dilate few facts.Petitioner No. 2 G. D. Padrah is an Advocate and the petitioner No. 1 Shiv Narayan is landlord of the House No. 403 Gol Bazar, Jabalpur. Petitioner No. 2 G. D. Padrah, Advocate lives at first floor as a tenant. The petitioner No. 2 occupied the upper floor premises up to 1981 and was living in the said house and also maintained his office as an Advocate. Thereafter he shifted in his own house but maintained his office in the said tenanted premises. There is an electric service line in that house and it is in the name of the petitioner No. 1 and he is paying the domestic charges. On 17-1-1986, some officer of the MPEB (M.P. Electricity Board) inspected the service meter and served a notice to the petitioner No. 1 that he is using ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-21-1999
Reported in : 2000CriLJ1760; 2000(1)MPLJ541
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. In this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the petitioner approaches this Court against filing of a report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. against him by Special Police Establishment attached to Lokayukt Office, on behalf of the State of M.P. for alleged offence of being in possession, during the period of his office as Executive Engineer, Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board (1973 to 1996) to pecuniary resources and property disproportionate to his known sources of income which he cannot satisfactorily account for, punishable under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.2. The only objection raised in this petition is that the investigation itself was unauthorized and without jurisdiction by the officers who conducted investigation, search and seizure. The officers in this case, undisputedly involved in search and investigation, were firstly; Shri S.K.S. Bisen, D.S.P. of Special Police Establishment and secondly Inspsector H.D....
Tag this Judgment!