Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian boilers amendment act 2007 section 29 amendment of section 33 Sorted by: old Court: madhya pradesh Page 7 of about 250 results (0.236 seconds)

Aug 16 1979 (HC)

Sitaram and ors. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1980MP4; 1979MPLJ817

Faizanuddin, J.1. This is a reference under Sub-section (1) of Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (Act No. 2 of 1899) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) having been made by a learned Member of the M. P. Board of Revenue, Gwalior, as the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, in consequence of a Revenue Revision No. 132-11/77 against an order dated 28-1-1977 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer and Collector of Stamps, Burhanpur, in Revenue Case No. 5-B-103/73-74. The short question as contained in paragraph 6 of the order of reference of the learned Member, Board of Revenue and referred to this Bench for its opinion is as follows; --'Whether in respect of instruments, which were registered prior to the coming into force of the amendments in 1975, the Sub-Registrar is empowered to make a reference to the Collector of Stamps in regard to under-valuation, once such instrument has been registered.'2. The factual aspects of this case, which emerge out, giving rise to this reference, a...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1980 (HC)

Mitthulal and ors. Vs. Badri Prasad and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1981MP1

C.P. Sen, J. 1. The following questions have been referred to the Full Bench for opinion as the questions are of general importance:--(i) Where one part of the order is not appealable, while the other part of the same order is appealable as a decree, but the second part is followed as a necessary consequence of the former part of the order, does a revision lie from the former part?(ii) Where it is held that by reason of some of the legal representatives of the deceased having not been brought on record, the suit cannot proceed and stands abated, will a revision lie from such order, although in the latter part of the same order, the suit is dismissed or consigned to the record?2. Certain material facts are required to be stated in order to fully appreciate the questions referred The deceased plaintiff Parmabai filed a suit against the non-applicants-defendants for declaration of her title and for perpetual injunction restraining them from interfering with her possession of the property,...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 1980 (HC)

Purushottamlal Kaushik Vs. Vidyacharan Shukla

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1980MP188; 1980MPLJ644

ORDERJ.S. Verma, J.1. The petitioner Purshottamlal Kaushik and the respondent Vidya Charan Shukla were two of the contesting candidates in the last Lok Sabha general elections held in January, 1980 from No. 18, Mahasamund Parliamentary Constituency. The result of the election was declared on 7-1-1980 and the respondent Vidya Charan Shukla was declared elected to the Lok Sabha from that constituency. This election result was notified in the official gazette on 10-1-1980. The present petition has been filed on 18-2-1980, for declaring the respondent's election to be void on two grounds, namely, under Section 100(1)(a) and Section 100(1)(d)(i) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Facts on which both the grounds are based are the same. All the relevant facts are admitted between the parties and the only question is whether on the admitted facts both or any of the grounds on which the petition is based have been made out. These facts are stated hereafter.2. The respondent Vidya Ch...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1980 (HC)

Kumari Nivedita JaIn Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1981MP129; 1981MPLJ244

G.P. Singh, C.J.1. By order dated 2nd April, 1980 the State Government made Rules for admission to 1st year M, B. B. S. course of medical colleges of Madhya Pradesh. These rules are not statutory. They were made in the exercise of the executive power of the State. The rules provide for holding of a Pre-Medical Examination for selection at candidates for admission to the Medical Colleges. The Pre-Medical Examination is held by a Board which is constituted by Rule 2. The selection for admission is made as provided in Rule 3 'from the merit-list prepared on the basis of the result of this examination.' No candidate can be admitted unless he has passed B. Sc. Part I or any equivalent examination. This is the minimum educational qualification prescribed by Rule 5 (1). Reservation of seats is provided for by Rule 7. There are 720 seats in all. Out of these, 15% seat19As are reserved for each of the categories of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates, which means that 108 seats are...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 1982 (HC)

Gwalior Rayon Mfg. (Wvg.) Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : 1982(10)ELT844(MP)

J.S. Verma, J.1. The Petitioner is an existing company, within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Birlagram, Nagda, in this State. The Petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of staple fibre of which sulphuric acid is an essential ingriedient. It also manufactures sulphuric acid and uses or consumes the entire quantity in the manufacture of staple fibre without selling any part of it. The dispute in this petition relates to the excise duty payable on the sulphuric acid so manufactured by the petitioner and used or consumed in its entirety in the manufacture of staple fibre at Nagda during the period between 10-11-1976 and 31-10-1978.2. Prior to 10-11-1976, excise duty on sulphuric acid was levied and collected on the basis of tariff value fixed by the Central Government from time to time under Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act 1944 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'). However, with effect from 10-11-1976, excise duty on sulphuric acid b...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 1982 (HC)

Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Madhya Pradesh Electrici ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1983MP93

J.S. Verma, J.1. The petitioner No.1, Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. is an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act. 1956, and having its registered office at Birlanagar, Gwalior, in the State of Madhya Pradesh. Petitioner No. 2, Jai Narain Somani, is a shareholder of this company, The petitioner No. 1 (hereinafter called 'the Company') has a composite textile mill at Birlangar, Gwalior, wherein it manufactures yarn and textiles. For running its mill, the company requires electricity and had entered into a contract with respondent No. 1, M. P. Electricity Board (hereinafter called 'the Board') for supply of electricity to it in accordance with the specified terms and conditions. Under the agreement dated 27-10-1971, between the company and the Board, 1500 K.W. power as an H.T. consumer, wag to be supplied by the Board to the Company and the agreement was to commence from the date reckoned according to the stipulation therein. Supply of 1590 K.W. power under this agreement...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 1983 (HC)

Electrofab Industries Vs. Sales Tax Officer and anr.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : [1984]56STC101(MP)

G.G. Sohani, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 29th November, 1981, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore, in Revision No. DCR/313/81-82.2. The material facts giving rise to this petition briefly are as follows :The petitioner, a firm consisting of partners Sunil, S/o Kalyanmal Vyas andPrabodh, S/o Vinayak Bhise, submitted an application dated 21st May, 1981, before respondent No. 1 for registration under the provisions of Section 15/16 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In that application, it was not disclosed that the partners of the petitioner-firm had interest in any other business even though in the prescribed application form, such information was required to be given. In the course of enquiry made by the Sales Tax Officer, it came to light that the partners of the petitioner-firm were carrying on business as partners of another firm 'Tekno...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1984 (HC)

Abdul Hakim and anr. Vs. Ahmad Khan

Court : Madhya Pradesh

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!

Aug 27 1984 (HC)

Balkrishna Das and ors. Vs. Perfect Pottery Co. Ltd., Jabalpur and ors ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

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!

Nov 24 1984 (HC)

Madhumilan Syntex Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

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!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //