Chhattisgarh Court September 2003 Judgments
Yashwant Kumar Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT79(CG)
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the provision of Clause (m) of Sub-section (1) of Section 36 of Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short 'the Adhiniyam'). The relevant provisions are extracted hereunder :'Section 36.- Disqualification for being office bearer of Panchayat :--36 (1) No person shall be eligible to be an office bearer of Panchayat who *** *** *** :(m) : has more than two living children one of whom is born on or after the 26th day of January 2001.(2) If any person having been elected (*** ***) as an office bearer of Panchayat--(a) subsequently becomes subject to any of the disqualification mentioned in Sub-section (1) and such disqualification is not removable or being removable is not removed (or becomes office bearer concealing his disqualification for it which has not been questioned and decided by any election petition under Section 122).*** *** *** ***He...
Tag this Judgment!Jeevati Bai and ors. Vs. Smt. Surmoti and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT54(CG)
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order passed by the 6th Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, dated 26th July, 2003 in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 32/2002 arising out of the order dated 24th April, 2002 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Class-I, Ambikapur in Civil Suit No. 8-A/2001.2. The brief facts leading to filing of this writ petition arc that the petitioners filed a civil suit for declaration of the title and permanent injunction and the relief of declaration is sought to the effect that the sale deed executed on 28-2-1992 in favour of the respondents in respect of the land described in Schedule B of the plaint be declared null and void and the petitioners be declared as owners, of the disputed land. The sale land in question is ancestral property of the plaintiffs/petitioners being Joint Hindu Family property; the same was acquired by Khekhe, the grand-father of petition...
Tag this Judgment!Raymond Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Chh12; 2004(1)MPHT33(CG)
ORDER1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Article 226/227 read with Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India by which they have challenged the order dated 25th July, 2003 passed by the Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The Board of Revenue has held that the Board of Revenue being the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority has every jurisdiction to entertain a revision application under Section 56(4) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short 'Stamp Act') as amended by the State of Madhya Pradesh, against the order dated 16-1-2001 passed by the Collector of the Stamp, District Janjgir Champa under Section 32 of the Act after following the procedure as envisaged under Section 31 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.2. The petitioner's petition is that the petitioner No. 1 established a cement division at Gopalnagar, District Janjgir Champa in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh in the year 1982. The Govt. of Madhya Pradesh welcomed the setting up of the...
Tag this Judgment!Neelkanth Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT33(CG)
L.C. Bhadoo, J. 1. Accused/appellant Neelkanth has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 21-5-1992 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Sessions Trial No. 1 of 1992 by which the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge after holding him guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code convicted and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that some quarrel had taken place between Ravinarayan (since deceased) and accused Neelkanth in the year 1984 and since then their relations were strained. Ravinarayan took the agricultural land of one Onkar Bharti for the purpose of sowing the crop and for that purpose he ploughed the land. This land was adjacent t...
Tag this Judgment!Harishankar @ Sanjay and anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT53(CG)
L.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The accused/appellants have preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.PC being aggrieved by the judgment dated 27-12-2001 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in ST. No. 267/2001 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge after holding the accused/appellants guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 1 month each and to undergo imprisonment for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 1 month each respectively.2. The prosecution case, in brief is that on 16-2-2001 Bhagwati Prasad (P.W. 2) gave merg intimation to the Police Station, Ratanpur to the effect that a dead body of an unknown person was lying on the road of Khutaghat Dam. On receiving this report ...
Tag this Judgment!Sunil Kumar Jachak Vs. State of M.P. (Now Chhattisgarh)
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ209; 2004(2)MPHT47(CG)
L.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The accused/appellant has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.PC being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 11th January, 1999, passed by the Sessions Judge, Raipur, in Sessions Trial No. 198/1998, by which the learned Sessions Judge after holding the accused/appellant guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the IPC sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution case in brief, is that on 25th March, 1998, at about 4 p.m., some altercation took place between the accused and his wife Usha, and the accused assaulted his wife with a wooden mallet (a wooden piece meant for washing clothes) of the size of 39.5 cms. in length. As a result of the assault when Usha became unconscious, the accused went to Mohd. Moin (P.W. 5) at about 7 p.m. and requested him to examine his wife. The accused also informed him that as he had assaulted his wife she had become unconscious. On this, Mohd. Moin went to the house of...
Tag this Judgment!Saiyad Shoukat Ali and anr. Vs. Smt. Tijia Bai and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT40(CG)
L.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by which they have challenged the order dated 1-7-2003 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, in Misc. Appeal No. 10/2003 affirming the order dated 2-5-2003 passed by the 3rd Civil Judge, Class-II, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No. 91-A/2003.2. Facts leading to filing of this writ petition, in brief are that Smt. Tijia Bai and 4 others who are respondent Nos. 1 to 5 in this petition filed a civil suit along with an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC against the petitioners in the Court of 3rd Civil Judge, Class-II for permanent injunction in which the plaintiffs/respondents herein mentioned that on 18-4-2002 they purchased a piece of land ad measuring 0.16 acre, bearing Khasra No. 85/61 through registered sale deed from the legal heirs of Harilal and since purchase of land, they are in possession and their names have also been entered in t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›