Chhattisgarh Court May 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.
State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Govind Lal Vora and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-09-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3707
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J.1. The aforesaid petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') are being disposed of by this common order, as both these petitions are arising out of the same order dated 11th August, 2005 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, in Criminal Revision No. 65/2005.2. Brief facts leading to filing of these petitions by the State, Govind Lal Vora' and one Ajay Tiwari are that petitioner Govind Lal was the President of Shiksha Pracharak Samiti, Raipur (for short 'the Samiti') during the period 1995 to 1998. During that period without any resolution of the Samiti or without seeking approval of any office bearer or the member of the Samiti he issued cheque Nos. 828685 & 828686 in favour of Pragati Prakashan on 4-4-1998 amounting Rs. 2,50,000/- and Rs. 50,000/-. The said amount of Rs. 3,00.000/- was deposited in the account of Pragati Prakashan of which Govind Lal Vora was Managing Director. He got entries effected fro...
Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Vs. Smt. Teras Bai and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT15(CG)
ORDERDilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. The appellant Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board (henceforth 'the Board') is aggrieved by the Judgment dated 02-08-2007 passed by the District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No. 02-B/2006 whereby in a case of death of a labourer-Shivkumar Dhruv on 15-08-2005 due to electrocution as a result of siphoning of the electricity to his field by clandestine pilferage committed by respondent No. 5-Samaru Lal Lasre, damages of Rs. 1,75,000/- against the appellant/Board were awarded to the respondents No. 1 to 4 being the widow and three minor children of the deceased.2. The only point urged by Shri R.S. Patel, learned Counsel for the appellant/Board in this appeal is that there is no evidence on record to show that death of Shivkumar Dhruv occurred due to any negligence on the part of the Board in maintaining electricity supply lines. It was contended that as admitted by Smt. Teras Bai, the widow of the deceased, due to a heavy rainfall and storm occurring a d...
Ramesh Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. Kristo Sao and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-05-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2109; AIR2008Chh65; 2008(4)MPHT114(CG)
ORDERD.R. Deshmukh, J.1. This order shall govern the appeal preferred by the driver and the owner against the award dated 16-12-1997 passed by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jashpur, District Raigarh (henceforth 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 7/96, whereunder in a case of death of a third party, i.e., a girl Ku. Sangeeta, aged 10 years, while exonerating the insurer, liability was fastened on the driver and the owner to pay compensation of Rs. 65,000/- to the claimant. It would also govern the cross-objection preferred by respondent No. 1/claimant under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure for enhancement of compensation.2. Admittedly, on 21-02-1996, the claimant Kristo Sao was going with his 10 years' old daughter Ku. Sangeeta near Ichkela Jamtoli when the was dashed by Truck No. OSC 6975 (henceforth 'the truck') being driven in a rash and negligent manner by appellant No. 1, owned by appellant No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 2 on the date of acciden...
Viswa Bharathi Institute and anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-05-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Chh68; 2008(4)MPHT25(CG)
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have challenged the validity of Chhattisgarh B.Ed. Pravesh Rules, 2006, framed by the State Government and published under Notification No. F-5-5-20/2006 dated 20-4-2006. The Challenge has been made on the ground of lack of competence on the part of State to make such legislation as the power to frame legislation in this regard has been vested with the Union under Entry 66 List-I of VIIth Schedule of the Constitution. It has also been challenged on the ground that the Parliament has already framed legislation on the subject vide the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (for short 'NCTE Act' or 'Act 1993') and the Statutes/Ordinances framed thereunder and no power has been given to the State, therefore, the Rules are ultra-vires of Constitution as also the NCTE Act.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a Society duly registered under the relevant provisions of C.G. Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1972. Petitioner No. 2 is the Director of petitione...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›