Chhattisgarh Court October 2008 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Arun Krishnarao Hazare Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-23-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT86(CG)
ORDERT.P. Sharma, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated 17-9-2008 passed by the Special Judge (CBI Cases), Raipur in Special Case No. 4/2007 whereby learned Special Judge has dismissed the objection/application filed on behalf of the applicant for acquittal on the ground that sanction for prosecution is not in accordance with law.2. The order impugned is challenged on the ground that the applicant who is a public servant is protected in terms of Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') and without any legal and proper sanction the Court is not competent to take cognizance of the offence alleged against him, and the applicant may raise the ground relating to competency of sanction at any stage even after framing of charge. Thus, the Court has committed illegality by not considering the application which the applicant has filed after framing of charge.3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned, copy of...
Pramod Cherwa and ors. Vs. Amit Sharma and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-21-2008
Reported in: 2008(0)MPHT73
ORDERRajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Learned Counsel for the appellants is heard on admission.2. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korea, District Baikunthpur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 18-9-2008, passed in Motor Claim Case No. 40/2006.3. The claimants, unfortunate parents, brother and sister of deceased Santosh claimed compensation of Rs. 30,24,000/- by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 19-12-2005 when the Tractor in which he was travelling was dashed by the offending vehicle Tata Spacio bearing registration No. C.G.-04/T/0797, resulting in his instantaneous death on the spot itself.4. The claimants further pleaded that deceased Santosh was aged about 18 years and used to earn Rs. 6,000/- per month as Carpenter. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties held that the deceased Santosh died on account of the i...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Raju Kesharwani Alias Durgesh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Chh13
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned Counsel for the appellant.2. By allowing I.A. No. 2/2008, the documents filed along with this application are taken on record.3. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned Counsel for the appellant is heard on admission.4. This is insurer's appeal against the award dated 9-5-2008, passed by the 12th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 151/2007.5. As against the compensation of Rs. 46,90,000/- claimed by respondent No. 1 Raju Kesarwani alias Durgesh by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 1-3-2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 7,69,861/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.6. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned Counsel for the appellant frankly and fairly conceded that the appellant/insurance Company in this...
South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Om Prakash Sathyapal
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT6(CG)
ORDERDhirendra Mishra, J.1. The instant miscellaneous appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act, 1940') is directed against the order dated 25-2-1994 passed in Misc. Civil Suit No. 1-A/91 whereby learned District Judge has rejected the application under Section 30 (a) & (c) of the Act, 1940 of the appellant and allowing the application under Section 14(2) of the Act has passed the judgment and decree in terms of the award dated 28th April, 1989 by the sole arbitrator.2. Undisputed facts are that the respondent was awarded contract for 'construction of Bunker and Additional Crusher for Manikpur Colliery'. The value of the contract was Rs. 6,48,135/- and the period for completion of the contract was 9 months. However, the aforesaid period was extended from time to time with the consent of both the parties up to 30th April, 1989. The respondent raised a dispute in the year 1982 in respect of certain extra work executed by the contractor, which were not menti...
Bhaktraj Lodhi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT83(CG)
ORDERK. Agnihotri, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 8-2-2002 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Commissioner, Raipur, in Case No. 83/A-19/ 2000-01 arising out of the order dated 9-8-1995 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Collector, Rajnandgaon, in Revenue Case No. 44/A-19 (6) year 1993-94, whereby the order passed by the Collector was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed.2. The indisputable facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner, are that the petitioner made an application on 30-1-1985 (Annexure P-l) to the Collector, Rajnandgaon for grant of patta of Government land bearing Khasra No. 224/1 area 0.45 acre in lieu of acquisition of the petitioner's land bearing Khasra No. 557 area 0.56 acre for the purpose of construction of road by the Government. The petitioner, without claiming any compensation, sought for grant of patta of the adjoining Government land bearing Khasra No. 224/1 area 0.45 acre. It was further stated in the said application that the peti...
Lokendra Tiwari Alias Kaushlendra Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ420
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. Appellant-Lokendra Tiwari alias Kaushlendra stands convicted under Section 302, I.P.C., for commission of murder of his wife-Saroj Bala, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 3 months, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 246/2001 on 31st of March, 2004.Deceased-Saroj Bala was married to the appellant on 19.4.2000. She was residing with the appellant and her in-laws in village Selar. On some difference, on account of alleged illicit relations of the appellant with one Rajeshwari Raj (PW-10), the deceased left the company of the appellant and came to her parents place in village Muruwa. After sometime their marital relations resumed and both husband and wife started living separately in a rented premise of one Arjun Das Vaishnaw in Tiffra, Bilaspur. The deceased was working as a teacher and was earning Rs. 1,000/- per month. The decease...
Anil Singh Vs. Smt. KholbaharIn Bai and State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-14-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Chh6
Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff in a suit for specific performance of contract is the appellant before us.2. The appellant/plaintiff instituted Civil Suit No. 4-A/2005 in the Court of VIIIth Additional District Judge, Bilaspur for specific performance of contract dated 22-09-2004 executed by respondent No. 1/defendant whereby she had agreed to sell her undivided 1/3rd share in the lands in area 9.22 acres situated in Village Ghuru and Ameri, Patwari Halka No. 24, Revenue Circle Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur to the appellant after final adjudication of the civil suit pending before the VIIth Civil Judge Class II, Bilaspur and the proceedings pending before the Revenue Courts, for a consideration of Rs. 8 Lakhs and had received advance of Rs. 7 Lakhs from the appellant/plaintiff in cash on the date of agreement. The said agreement Ex.P-1 bore thumb impression of respondent No. 1 and signature of the appellant/plaintiff and was attested by Kishun Sing...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›