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.
Amarsai Amar Singh Netam Since Died Through Proposed Appellant Sukhcha ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-16-2011
Order (Oral) I.M. Quddusi, J; 1. Heard. 2. The appellant has filed this appeal against the order dated 08.04.2009 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation-cum-Labour Court, Jagdalpur (CG) (for brevity `the Commissioner') in Case No.B/11/WC Act/ Fatal/2008. 3. The appellant herein is the son of deceased claimant who had filed the claim petition before the Commissioner seeking compensation on the ground that he was dependent on his son Shishupal, who lost his life in the course of and under the employment of respondent No.1. However, during the pendency of claim petition, father of the appellant herein died and the present appellant moved an application for substitution in place of deceased appellant. The Commissioner dismissed the application on the ground that the appellant does not come within the definition of `dependant' as defined under Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act, 1923. Being aggrieved by said order of rejection, the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel f...
Shakuntala Devi Parakh and Another Vs. Subhash Sabath and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-16-2011
Oral Order (MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988) I.M. QUDDUSI, J, 1. This appeal has been filed by the claimants against the impugned award dated 31.12.2003 passed by IV Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Jagdalpur in Claim Case No.75/2002, dismissing the claim petition filed by the claimants who were legal heirs/representatives of the deceased. The deceased was owner and one of the occupants of the vehicle in question. 2. Brief facts of the case as per the version of the claimants are that on 06.04.2001, deceased Gyanchand Prakash alongwith his daughter and other relatives was coming from Raipur to Jagdalpur in a Car bearing Regn.No.M.P.25-C/0036. Respondent no.2 was the insurer of the vehicle. On the way at about 4.00 a.m., the said vehicle, which was being driven by respondent no.1 Subhash Sabath in a rash and negligent manner, struck against a tree near P.T.S. godown Boregaon due to which all passengers sustained injuries. They were broug...
Deepak Since Dead Through Legal Representatives and Others Vs. Rajkuma ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-16-2011
(FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 96 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE) 1. This is plaintiffs' first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for brevity `the C.P.C.') against the judgment and decree dated 16.09.1998 passed in Civil Suit No. 28-A/1995 by the 1st Additional District Judge, Balodabazar, Dist. Raipur whereby and whereunder the plaintiffs' suit has been partly decreed. 2. Facts of the case in brief are as under:- (i) The original plaintiff late Deepak Vishnoi and appellants No.2 to 4 instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction. Admittedly, the plaintiffs and defendants had common ancestor late Babulal Vishnoi, son of Chokhelal Vishnoi. Late Babulal Vishnoi owned agricultural lands admeasuring 18.256 hectares situated at village Champa and two houses at Baloda Bazar, one house is situated on plot No.114 admeasuring 4231 sq.ft. and another is situated on plot No.26 to 28 admeasuring 2075 sq.ft. (ii) According to plaintiff, the aforesaid property belonged to lat...
Avinash Gurjar Vs. Aarti Gurjar
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-16-2011
Oral Order (APPEAL UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984) I.M. QUDDUSI, J, 1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 18.3.2011 passed by the Family Court, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No.140-A/2009 which was filed u/s 11 read with section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for declaration of the marriage performed between the appellant and respondent as nullity on the ground that the respondent wife was mentally ill and suffering from mental disorder. 2. During the pendency of this appeal, the respondent was sent for medical check up and for obtaining report from Jawaharlal Nehru and Research Center, Bhilai and a report was received regarding examination of the respondent by Dr. A. K. Biswas, Head of the Department of Psychiatry vide medical opinion dated 26.08.2011. The following was the opinion which is reproduced as under: "Patient directed from High Court, Bilaspur, for psychiatric evaluation vide Direction No. F.A.M.No. 40/2011. Historical information from ...
Motiram Vs. Jaleshwar and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-16-2011
(Memo of appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act) Rajeev Gupta, C.J. 1) Appellant/claimant Motiram is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara, district Durg (for short `the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.01.2010, passed in Claim Case No.66/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.13,40,000/- claimed by the appellant/ claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 23.04.2009, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.5,70,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) Shri H.P. Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.5,70,000/- only though the appellant/claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident. 4) Shri Amrit...
Tikamnath Gajpal and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Now State of C ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-15-2011
(Second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure) 1. By this second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellants have challenged legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 8-10-92 passed by the 5th Additional District Judge, Durg in Civil Appeal No.5-A/92 affirming the judgment and decree dated 13-9-89 passed by the 6th Civil Judge Class-II, Durg in Civil Suit No.36-A/88, whereby the suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed on behalf of the appellants/plaintiffs has been dismissed. 2. Present second appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- 1) Whether the Courts below were justified in holding that the lands in dispute were not the khudkast lands of the present appellants and their predecessors when the lands were so recorded in khasra year 1932-33 and there is presumption of the continuity of land use? 2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case could it be held that...
Kalindri Bai Dewangan and Another Vs. Khileshwar Patel and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
(Memo of appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act) Rajeev Gupta, C.J. 1) This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short `the Tribunal') vide award dated 03.03.2003, passed in Claim Case No.90/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.16,00,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents and sister of deceased Ravindra Dewangan @ Raju, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 05.06.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.92,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Ravindra Dewangan @ Raju died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 05.06.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and n...
Amiya Kumar Datta Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Anot ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-09-2011
(Second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure) 1. By this second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellant has challenged legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 8-5-2000 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Ambikapur in Civil Appeal No.16A/98 reversing the judgment and decree of decreeing the suit filed on behalf of the appellant herein, dated 2-4-1998 passed by the 3rd Civil Judge Class-II, Ambikapur in Civil Suit No.145A/96, whereby learned Civil Judge Class-II has decreed the suit for eviction. 2. Present second appeal has been admitted on following substantial questions of law: - "(i) Whether, lower appellate Court was justified in holding that respondent No.1 could avail the benefit of renewal both under the agreement of lease as also u/S 5 (2) of the ESSO Act, 1974 one after another? (ii) Whether, after exercising the option of renewal twice, provisions of Section 5 (2) of the ESSO Act could be invoked ...
Smt. Shanti Devi Vs. Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of Ind ...
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Nov-09-2011
S. C. VYAS, PRESIDENT This order will govern disposal of appeal Nos.279/11, 280/11, 281/11 and 282/11, which have been preferred by unsuccessful complainant of complaint case Nos.64/09, 66/09, 63/09 and 67/09, respectively, decided by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Korea. Baikunthpur (hereinafter called .District Forum. for short) vide separate orders dated 08.04.2011, in favour of the respondent / Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter called .LIC. for short). The complaints have been dismissed on the ground that the deceased insured was guilty of suppression of material facts, at the time of making proposal for insurance and so the appellant is not entitled for any benefit under the life insurance policies, issued in favour of the deceased, by the respondent. Apart from it, the appellant has been directed to pay cost of Rs.500/- in each complaint case, to the respondent / LIC within a period of one month, otherwise the amount will carry interest @ 9% p.a. 2. I...
Uniworth Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Appeals Raipur and Oth ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
(Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution Of India) 1. Challenge in this petition is to the legality and validity of the order dated 09.05.2007 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise (Appeals - I) Raipur, {for short `the CCE(A)} in Appeal No. 41/CE/RPR/Appl.I/2007 and further, to restore the said appeal and hear the same without insisting on pre- deposit. 2. The CCE(A), by order dated 09.05.2007, dismissed the appeal No. 41/2007 which was preferred against the Order-in-Original No. 325-327/CH: 51/RPR/ADC/06, dated 30.11.2006 passed by Additional Commissioner, Central Excise Hqrs. Raipur. The petitioner, vide interim order No.04/RPR-I/2007 dated 20.03.2007, was directed to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 25 lacs on or before 12.04.2007. The appeal was directed to be listed on 25.04.2007, subject to compliance of the order dated 20.03.2007. The petitioner requested for extension of date of pre-deposit vide letter dated 10.04.2007. It appears that t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »