Chhattisgarh Court November 2011 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.
Modern Foundry Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-21-2011
(Writ Petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent No.2 Bharat Aluminium Company Limited (for short "the respondent company") to make payment settled by Dave Committee with commercial interest from the date the material was supplied. Further restoration of the petitioner's industry. It is further sought a relief that the petitioner be granted a sum of Rs.35.00 lacs (approx.) as compensatory costs on the basis of Rs.3.00 lacs per year from the date the industry stopped production and damages from the respondent No.2. It is also prayed that the State may be directed to enquire into the financial irregularities allegedly committed by the respondent No.4. 2. The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner, are that at the instance of Shri P.N. Sharma, the then, Manager (Smelter) of BALCO, the respondent No.4 misused his office and caused loss to the petitioner firm to ensure the monopoly of Hindustan F...
Bisakha Bai Vs. Ritu Bai and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-18-2011
(WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 and 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 30.06.2010 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), (for short `the SDO') Saja, District Durg, in Case No. 10/A-89/09-10, whereby the election petition filed by the petitioner, has been dismissed. 2. The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner contested for the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Bijagond, Block and Tahsil Saja, District Durg. After completion of election process, the respondent No. 1 was declared elected. The petitioner preferred an election petition under section 122 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 on the ground that the respondent No. 1 did not possess the requisite qualification. After hearing the parties, the SDO, Saja passed the impugned order dismissing the election petition of the petitioner. 3. On perusal of the impugned order dated 30.06.2010, it is ap...
State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Sujan Singh Kanwar and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-18-2011
(PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE ORDER DATED 10.03.2010.) 1. The instant review petition has been filed by the State/applicant seeking review of the order dated 10.03.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 2214 of 2008 (Sujan Singh Kanwar and 27 others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Another) wherein the writ petition filed by the respondent No. 1 to 28, herein, was allowed. 2. There is a delay of 537 days in preferring this review petition for which, the applicant has filed an application for condonation of delay, reiterating the same grounds which appears to be the ground for review and further, that the applicant had sought withdrawal of the Writ Appeal No. 338/2011, preferred against the order dated 10.03.2010, with liberty to file this review petition. Thus, sufficient reasons have been shown. Delay is condoned. 3. The applicant/State seeks review of the order dated 10.03.2010 on the ground that there were certain lapses in the process of making Chhattisgarh Scheduled Tribe and Schedule...
Shabnam Karim Vs. Ram Kumar
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-18-2011
(SECOND CIVIL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE) 1. By this second appeal under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (in short `the Code') appellant has challenged the legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 13/12/2010 passed by District Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.) in civil appeal No. 4A/2010 affirming the judgment and decree of eviction and means profit against appellant dated 4/12/2009 passed by 1st Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspur in civil suit No. 5A/2008. 2. Present second appeal has been admitted for consideration on the following substantial question of law:- "Whether both the Courts below were justified in passing a decree against the appellant under Section 12(1)(a) of the C.G. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 in the light of the fact that rate of rent was in dispute and the trial court has not fixed any provisional rent under Section 13(2) of the C.G. Accommodation Control Act, 1961?" 3. For decision of aforesaid substantial question of law, ...
Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd and Another Vs. State of M ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-17-2011
(Petition u/S 482 of the Cr.P.C) 1. By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") the petitioners have called in question the legality, validity and maintainability of the criminal proceedings instituted upon complaint filed by respondent No.2, alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "the N.I. Act"). The petitioners have also prayed that the order dated 24th June, 2000, by which the cognizance has been taken against the petitioners and other Directors of the Company and process issued, launching prosecution, be quashed. 2. The factual matrix giving rise to this petition, as adumbrated in the petition and relevant for decision of the petition, are that respondent No.2 instituted a complaint under Section 200 of the Code against the petitioner's Company and its Directors in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, alleging com...
Satjas Glorocks Private Ltd Vs. Bharat Aluminum Company Limited
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-17-2011
(Appeal under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996) Radhe Shyam Sharma, J.: 1. The instant appeal is directed against order dated 19-11-2009 passed by the District Judge, Korba in Civil Suit (Arbitration Case) No.31A/2007, whereby the application preferred by respondent Bharat Aluminum Company Limited under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (henceforth `the Act, 1996') has been allowed and award dated 25-7-2007 passed by the Sole Arbitrator has been set aside. 2. Facts of the case, as projected in it, in brief, are that appellant M/s Satjas Glorocks Private Ltd. is engaged in business of mining, transportation and logistics solutions. Respondent Bharat Aluminum Company Limited is a well-known aluminum maker. The respondent extracts Bauxite from its captive mines at Mainpat in Surguja District (Chhattisgarh). The ore, thus mined, is then transported by road to its alumina plant in Korba District (Chhattisgarh). This mining and transportat...
Dinkar Rao Vs. Bhaguni Bai and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-17-2011
(Second Appeal under Section 100 of CPC) 1. By this second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short `CPC'), the appellant has challenged legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 5.4.1995 passed by the Additional District Judge, Dhamtari, then District Raipur, in Civil Appeal No.1A/91, reversing the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge Class-I, Dhamtari, in Civil Suit No.151A/85, whereby the Civil Judge Class-I has dismissed civil suit filed by respondents No. 1 to 4/plaintiffs for declaration of partition, possession and permanent injunction and by allowing the appeal the lower appellate Court has decreed the suit in favour of respondents No.1 to 5. 2. The present second appeal was admitted on 16.10.96 on the following substantial questions of law:- i) "Whether in view of the fact, PW-1, Sajan Bai admitted in her statement that Kushalrao was in sound physical condition prior to one month of his death? i) Whether the finding record...
Pawan Kumar Dewangan Vs. Rama Dewangan
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-17-2011
(FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 28 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1955) 1. The appeal, in a matrimonial case, is by the husband is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.06.1998 passed by the 5th Additional District Judge, Raipur in Civil Suit No.452-A/1996 whereby and whereunder the appellant's petition filed under Section 13 (1) (i) and 13 (1) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act of 1955') for grant of divorce has been dismissed. 2. Facts of the case in brief are as under :- (i) Marriage between the appellant - Pawan Kumar Dewangan and respondent - Rama Dewangan was solemnized in the year 1970, as per Hindu Rites and Customs. (ii) The marriage, according to the appellant, lasted upto 1990 when respondent left matrimonial home. Since then, the appellant and respondent are living separately. (iii) According to the appellant, no child was born from the wedlock. Respondent developed illicit relationship with one Sehattar Ram Yadav of her parental village resulting i...
Dr. J.K. Dani Vs. Amrit Lal Yadav
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Nov-17-2011
S. C. VYAS, PRESIDENT 1. This appeal is directed against order 22.10.2009, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Korba (hereinafter called .District Forum. for short) in complaint case No.51/2003, whereby the appellant herein has been directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint, till the date of payment, on the allegation that he committed negligence while performing surgical operation on the eye of the complainant, resulting in total loss of vision. In addition to it, he has also been directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental and physical agony and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation. 2. Indisputably, the respondent / complainant reached to the Hospital of the appellant on 23.11.2000 with complaint of having cataract in the right eye. The appellant after examination advised for surgical operation for removal of cataract and for implantation of artificial lense. The complainant was admitted on 26.11.2000 in th...
Sanjay Kumar Das Vs. M.D., Honda Motor Cycle and Scooter India (P) Lim ...
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Nov-17-2011
S.C. VYAS, PRESIDENT This order will govern disposal of Appeal No.533/2011 as well as Appeal No.540/2011, which have been preferred respectively by the complainant and O.P.No.2 of Complaint Case No.59/2011 decided by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (C.G.) (hereinafter called .District Forum. for short) vide order dated 30.08.2011, directing the O.P.No.2 to return the vehicle in question after removal of the rusts and after fresh denting and painting and to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.700/- as cost of litigation. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred in this order in their capacity, as they were enjoying before the District Forum. Original of this order be retained in record of Appeal No.533/2011 and a copy thereof be placed in the record of Appeal No.540/2011. 2. The grievance of the complainant before the District Forum, was that a motorcycle, which was sold by the OPs to him was not new one...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »