Chhattisgarh Court July 2009 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.
Ku. Sita Garhewal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-29-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT59(CG)
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. With the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finally.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that vide intimation letter dated 23-2-1999 (Annexure P-l), the name of the petitioner was sent through the Employment Exchange, Korba for appointment on the post of Assistant Grade- III. The news item (Annexure P-2), was published in daily newspaper Dainik Bhaskar dated 22-3-1999, in this regard. The recruitment process was initiated under the special drive for recruitment on various posts, reserved for the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Scheduled Caste women and Scheduled Tribe women, candidates, which remained vacant on account of non-availability of candidates. The selection was made through interview. Name of several persons, including the petitioner, were recommended for appointment. This was a special drive to clear the backlog on account of non-availability of candidates in the general selection meth...
Ramnaresh, Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-24-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4344
Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. This judgment shall govern Criminal Appeal No. 1117/2007 preferred by the appellants/accused Ramnaresh, Vishwanath Singh, Amar Singh and Ranjeet Kewat and Criminal Reference No. 3/2007 under Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth `the Code') by Shri Ram Kumar Tiwari, the Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 403/2006.2. The Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur has, vide judgment dated 20-11-2007 delivered in Sessions Trial No. 403/2006, convicted the appellants/accused Ramnaresh, Vishwanath Singh, Amar Singh and Ranjeet Kewat under Sections 449, 376(2)(g) and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 200/- each and in default additional rigorous imprisonment for 1 month under Section 449 of the Indian Penal Code, to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/- each and in default additional r...
F.C. JaIn Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT10
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 28th April, 2008 (Annexure P-3) whereby the name of the petitioner Shri Fattuchand Jain was removed from the Notary Register under provisions of Section 10(d) of the Notaries Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act, 1952').2. The indisputable facts, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed as Notary by order dated 8th January, 2003 (Annexure P-l) for a period of five years. The petitioner applied for renewal of certificate of Notary on 15th October, 2007 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner received the impugned order dated 28th April, 2008 (Annexure P-3) whereby the name of the petitioner was removed from the Notary Register under the provisions of Section 10(d) of the Act, 1952, on the ground that on enquiry, it was found that the petitioner was not fit to perform the work of Notary.3. Shri Tiwari, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order dated 28th April, 2008 (Annexure P-...
Pramila W/O Jawahar Lal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT4
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.1. Appellant Pramila stands convicted under Sections 302 and 201/34, IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 100/-and RI for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 100/- respectively with default sentence of 1 month, with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently, by the First Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Ramanujganj, District Sarguja (CG) on 31st of August, 2006.2. The facts, brieily stated, are as under:Deceased Ramlal was the father of the appellant. Co-accused Norashiya Bai is the wife of the deceased. Co-accused Jawahar is the husband of appellant Pramila and co-accused Ramnath Gond is brother of Norashiya Bai and brother-in-law (Shala) of deceased Ramlal. The allegations are that prior to 23-11-2005, the accused persons namely Pramila (present appellant), Jawahar and Norashiya Bai committed murder of deceased Ramlal and took the dead body to a distance place in Saharapani forest and buried the same with the assistance...
Rambilas Agrawal and anr. Vs. Bihari Lal Agrawal and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-15-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT76(CG)
ORDERN.K. Agarwal, J.1. The instant petition is directed against the order dated 6-4-2009 passed by the Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur in Revision Case No. RN/02/R/A-27/199/2008 Village Mohbhattha, Tehsil Mungeli, Distt. Bilaspur whereby and whereunder, learned Board of Revenue quashed the order passed by the Additional Tehsildar, Sargaon dated 28-9-2004 and the order dated 5-5-2007 passed in Sub Divisional Officer, Mungeli in first appeal and the order dated 27-2-2008 in second appeal.2. Brief facts of the case are as under:(i) That, an application under Section 178 of C.G. Land Revenue Code (briefly, 'the Code') was preferred by the petitioner Rambilas Agrawal for recording his name on the land bearing Khasra No. 420/2, 450/1 and 452 in place of respondents in pursuance of one partition deed dated 21-3-2001. On 28-9-2004, the Additional Tehsildar under Section 35 (2) of the Code passed an ex parte partition order directing mutation of aforesaid land in name of applicant in ...
Ram Sharik Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-14-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT37(CG)
ORDERPritinker Diwaker, J.1. The petitioner who retired from service as Forest Guard on 31-12-2004, had approached the State Administrative Tribunal on 13-10-1997 by way of Original Application assailing therein the communication letter dated 12-9-97 (Annexure P-10) issued by respondent No. 3, Divisional Forest Officer informing him that his claim for back wages was considered in compliance with the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge Class-II, Gariyaband, in Civil Suit No. 2-A/85 and has been rejected on the principle of 'no work no pay'.2. A thumbnail sketch of the turn of events is necessary for disposal of the present petition.3. The petitioner was working as Forest Guard by virtue of order dated 17-12-65. He became a permanent employee of the department on 1-3-1977. As on 10-6-1981 he proceeded on unauthorize leave, his services came to be terminated by order dated 19-7-1982 with effect from 10-6-1982. The said termination order was challenged by the petitioner in Civil ...
Durgesh Pradhan and ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-14-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4391
T.P. Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5-4-2006 passed by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge (F. T. C). Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No. 137/2002 whereby and whereunder learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge after holding the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304, Part II of the Indian Penal Code each of them sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 8 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month.2. Judgment of conviction and order of sentence is challenged on the ground that without there being an iota of evidence the Court below has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforementioned and thereby committed an illegality.3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 31-12-2004 at night Fayeem Ahmad (since deceased) was present near Torwa Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Bilaspur with other persons who were enjoying the...
Shekharesh Bhattacharya Vs. Sardar Charanjit Singh and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-13-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4242
ORDERDilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. The unsuccessful petitioner in criminal revision No. 668/1999 has preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth 'the Code') praying for dismissing the complaint and quashing the process which has been issued against him in criminal case No. 1172/1998 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class by order dated 26-10-1999.2. Brief facts necessary to unfold the main issue in the petition are that the respondent No. 1 Charanjit Singh filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur alleging that he had agreed to purchase the land situated at plot No. 19/3, Block No. 19 in Civil Station, Raipur from the petitioner and his brother's son-respondent No. 2 on 5-7-1994. Under the agreement, the respondent No. 1 had initially paid Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner and the respondent No. 2. According to the terms of the agreement, after getting the renewal of the lease of the property mentioned above, the petit...
Sona Ralsel Vs. Kiran Mayee Nayak (Smt.) and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-13-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Chh55; 2009(4)MPHT43(CG)
ORDERN.K. Agarwal, J.1. The instant petition is directed against the part of the order dated 19-12-2006 passed by Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur in H.M. No. 16-A/2006 whereby and whereunder application under Order 1 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of CPC filed by the petitioner herein has been dismissed by the Trial Court.2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this petition are that the respondents herein jointly filed petition under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act (briefly 'the Act') against the petitioner herein for claiming a relief of declaration to the effect that the marriage solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 is a nullity.3. The petitioner preferred an application (Annexure P-2) under Order 1 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of CPC submitting that as far as respondent No. 1 is concerned, she has no right to prefer an application under Section 11 of the Act and, therefore, the application filed by the respondents suffers from mi...
Thobhani Auto Mobiles Vs. State of Chhattisgarh,
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-09-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT48(CG)
ORDERSatish K. Agnihotri, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties.2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:7. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be 1 pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner from the possession of the respondent No. 2 kind perusal.7.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 04.08.07 Annexure P-37.4 Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstance of the case, may also kindly be granted.7.4 Cost of the petition be also awarded.' 2. The indisputable facts, as projected by the petitioner is that the petitioner is a firm engaged in the business of Kerosene oil. The petitioner hires tankers for lifting kerosene oil from depots. On 19.07.2007 the petitioner lifted kerosene oil from Raipur, Mandir Hasaud Depot which was to be unloaded at Ramanujnagar, Dist...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »