Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990(0)MPLJ727
B.C. Verma, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur, has referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question for the decision by this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the income arising to the minor sons of the assessee from their admission to the benefits of partnership was not liable to be included in computing the total income of the assessee ?'2. The assessee in this case is one Manakram. The years of assessments are 1976-77 and 1977-78. Dilip Kumar and Suresh Kumar, two minor sons of the assessee, were admitted to the benefit, of the partnership firm by name 'Messrs. United Service Station, Patna'. Yet other two minor sons, Ashok Kumar and Brijlal, were admitted to the benefit of another partnership firm, styled as 'Messrs. Krishna Dal Mill'. The assessee himself was a partner in both these firms, as representative of the Hindu undivided family. The In...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990MPLJ417
ORDERT.N. Singh, J.1. Nine years ago, the petitioner came to this Court and lodged the instant petition for redressal of a two-fold grievance complaining brazen violation by respondents 1 to 4 of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and of statutory provisions resulting in his supersession and loss of seniority.2. There are three sets of statutory Rules which fall for our consideration in this case and it is necessary, therefore, to state clearly the position in that regard at the very outset. The Border Security Force Act, 1968, for short, 1968 Act, takes care to indicate vide section 142(1) the fact of prior existence of the 'Force' constituted under the Act; sub-section (3) saves expressly anything done or any action taken generally and also in particular in relation to any person appointed or enrolled in the 'Force'. The Border Security Force Rules, 1969, for short, 1969 Rules, have been framed by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred under section 141 of 1968 Ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990(0)MPLJ621
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. This and other connected petitions for bail, raise and involve a common question of law as regards the scope and amplitude of section 37 of the Narcotic Durgs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (as amended by Amendment Act No. 2 of 1989) for short hereinafter referred to as the. Act.2. Learned counsel on both sides, who include Sarvashri H. S. Oberai, Joshi, and Tiwari for the applicants seeking bail and Shri Khan for the Department of Narcotics and Shri Desai, for the State have forcefully presented their view points. Both agree and rightly so, at this stage, that the factual allegations as made, cannot be disputed; yet Shri Oberai maintained that such procedural lapses on the part of the investigating agency, which would ultimately be materially affecting the prosecution case, would be one such circumstance which should be taken into consideration by the Court, while reaching the satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that accused is not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990CriLJ1990
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. This and other connected petitions for bail, raise and involve a common question of law as regards the scope and amplitude of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psycotropic Substances Act 1985 (as amended by Amendment Act No. 2 of 1989) for short hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. Learned counsels on both sides, who include Sarvashri H. Section Oberai, Joshi, and Tiwari for the applicants seeking bail and Shri Khan for the Department of Narcotics and Shri Desai, for the State have forcefully presented their view points. Both agree and rightly so, at this stage, that the factual allegations as made, cannot be disputed; yet Shri Oberai maintained that such procedural lapses on the part of the investigating agency, which would ultimately be materially affecting the prosecution case, would be one such circumstance, which should be taken into consideration by the Court, while reaching the satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that accused is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (1990)87CTR(MP)66; [1990]186ITR348(MP)
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), at the instance of the Revenue. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of the Tribunal's consolidated order dated October 11, 1984, passed in ITA Nos. 183 and 184 of 1983 for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the calculation of tax payable by the assessee having been done as per ITNS-150 forms in March, 1982, the rectification under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was barred by limitation ?'2. The assessment orders for both the years 1976-77 and 1977-78 were passed under Section 143(1) of the Act on October 29, 1977. Later on, certain mistakes in the assessment orders were detected by the Income-tax Officer and, therefore, notices were issued to the assessee for rectification of the mistakes. The assessee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990MPLJ682
ORDERFaizanuddin, J.1. The order passed in this petition will also govern the disposal of M.P. No. 1903 of 1988 (Nandu Singh v. State of M. P.); M. P. No. 2161 of 1988 (Shiv Dayal v. State of M.P. and 2 Ors.); M P. No. 2195 of 1989 Uaggi and Bhana v. Director General of Prisons, Bhopal and 2 Ors.) M. P. No. 2204 of 1988 (Balram v. State of M.P. and Anr.) M. P. No. 2328 of 1988 Shamser Singh, Kunj Bihari Singh, Prithvipal Singh and Netraj Singh v. State of M.P.) M.P. No. 2643 of 1988 (Rannu, Chunwad and Kirpal Singh v. State of M.P. and Anr.): M.P. No. 2927 of 1988 (Ramchandar alias Kaliya v. State of M.P.): M.P. No. 2929 of 1988 (Kachroo Singh v. State of M.P. and Anr.): M. P. No. 3383 of 1988 (Khunna v. The State of M.P. and Anr.): M. P. No. 3/89 (Semali v. State of M. P. and Anr.); M.P. 3035 of 89 (Shiv Sahay v. State of M.P. and Anr.) and M.P. No. 3835 of 1989 (Umashankar and Jamuna v. State of M. P. and Anr.) as in all these petitions common question of law is involved for consider...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990CriLJ2704
ORDERFaizanuddin, J.1. The order passed in this petition will also govern the disposal of M.P. No. 1903 of 1988 (Nandu Singh v. State of M.P.); M.P. No. 2161 of 1988 (Shiv Dayal v. State of M.P. and 2 Ors.); M.P. No. 2195 of 1989 (Jaggi and Bhana v. Director General of Prisons Bhopal and 2 Ors.) M.P. No. 2204 of 1988 (Balram v. State of M.P. and Anr.) M.P. No. 2328 of 1988 (Shamser Singh, Kunj Bihari Singh, Prithvipal Singh and Netraj Singh v. State of M.P.) M.P. No. 2643 of 1988 (Rannu, Chunwad and Kirpal Singh v. State of M.P. and Anr.); M.P. No. 2927 of 1988 (Ram-chandar alias Kaliya v. State of M.P.); M.P. No. 2929 of 1988 (Kachroo Singh v. State of M.P. and Anr.); M.P. No. 3383 of 1988 (Khunna v. State of M.P. and Anr.); M.P. No. 3/89 (Semali v. State of M.P. and Anr.); M.P. 3035 of 89 (Shiv Sahay v. State of M.P. and Anr.) and M.P. No. 3835 of 1989 (Umashanker and Jamuna v. State of M.P. and Anr.) as in all these petitions common question of law is involved for consideration of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1990MP171; 1990(0)MPLJ253
V.D. Gyani, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners (in all 23) have challenged the'Rules' for admission to Post-Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses in Medical Colleges of the State of Madhya Pradesh, as also the rules for allotment of House-jobs, in the Hospitals attached to the Medical Colleges in t-he State.2. It is an. admitted position at these admissions to Post-Graduate Courses are governed by executive instructions issued by the State Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India, although they are titled as Madhya Pradesh Selection for Post-Graduate Courses (Clinical, Para-clinical and Non-Clinical Courses) in Medical Colleges of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as P.G. Rules). The rules pertaining to Diploma Courses are referred to as 'Diploma Rules'. These rules have been annexed to the petition as Annexures P/1 and P/3. It may also be noted that though titled and called as 'Rules', they are not sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1990MP150; I(1990)DMC14
Gulab C. Gupta, J.1. This appeal filed underSection 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21-10-83 passed by Shri D. R. Pundlik, District Judge, Raipur in Civil Suit No. 28A of 1982 dissolving the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act. 2. That the parties were married in accordance with Hindu rites in March, 1988 and lived together as husband and wife for a year and a half, does not appear to be in dispute. According to the respondent's application under Section 13 of the Act, the appellant was suffering from epilepsy, as a result of which she very often lost consciousness and suffered convulsions. The respondent claims to have got her treated and spent Rs. 2,000/-to Rs. 3,000/- for that purpose, without any result. In his application, it is alleged that though the appellant suffered the disease from before the date of marriage, he was not informed abou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990CriLJ1179
V.D. Gyani, J.1. This appeal (Cr.A. 60/ 85) is connected with Cr.A. 82/85 preferred by co-accused Mushtali, who was also jointly tried along with other accused appellants Nawab, Abbas and Shabbir. Both these appeals, therefore, were heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. Appellants Mushtaque and Nawab have been found to be guilty of offence punishable Under Section 376 IPC, while appellants Abbas and Shabbir have convicted Under Section 370/34 IPC and all of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. Mushtaque in addition to the above sentence, has also been found to be guilty of a charge under Section 366, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for three years.2. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 18-1-85 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Shajapur (Camp Shujalpur) in S.T. No. 80/84, the accused have preferred these appeals.3. Prosecution case was that Parwati was married to Ramesh of village Dhiglepur. On the date of incident i.e. on 12th o...
Tag this Judgment!