Chhattisgarh Court July 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.
Gammon India Limited Vs. the State of Chhattisgarh and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-28-2011
(Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India)1. By this petition, the petitioner prays (i) for setting aside the impugned order dated 30-9-2010 (Annexure - P/4) passed by the Chhattisgarh Arbitration Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal') in Ref. case No (Gammon India Ltd. v. The State of Chhattisgarh and Another); (ii) to declare that the petitioner is entitled to the remedy of arbitration under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short `the Act, 1996"); (iii) to declare that the time period spent before the Tribunal shall be excluded for the purpose of limitation in the arbitration proceedings under the Act, 1996; and (iv) to issue orders for refund of Court fee amounting to Rs.6,98,714/-, which was deposited for instituting reference case before the Tribunal.2. The facts of the case, in brief, as projected by the petitioner, for adjudication of the dispute, are that the petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of the C...
Kirtanram Mansai Uranv Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh)
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-28-2011
Radhe Shyam Sharma, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23-12-1994 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District Surguja in Sessions Trial No.111/92. By the impugned judgment, appellant Kirtanram has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: On 29-10-1991 at about 12 noon, when deceased Jeeturam was returning after taking milk, the appellant demanded milk from him and in this regard some altercation took place between them. Due to the altercation, the appellant assaulted the deceased by an Axe, causing his death. Shivnath (PW-1) lodged First Information Report (Ex.P-8) and Merg Intimation (Ex.P-9) in Police Station Sitapur. The investigating officer rushed the place of occurrence, gave notice to Panchas and prepared Inquest (Ex.P-1) on the dead body of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination t...
B.S. Bariha Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-27-2011
ORDER (ORAL):(Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 1-2-2011 (Annexure - P/1) passed by the respondent No.1 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Raigarh to Ambikapur.3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is working in the office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Raigarh, has been transferred and posted as Labour Officer, Ambikapur and the respondent No.3, who is Assistant Labour Officer, holding class III non-gazetted post in the Labour Department, has been transferred and posted in place of the petitioner in spite of the fact that as per the rules, the respondent No.3 is not eligible to discharge the duties of the Assistant Labour Commissioner. Learned counsel further submits that the impugned order of transfer is not sustainable in the eyes of law, as the petitione...
Hukum Lal Sahu by Legal Representatives Smt Keshari Sahu and Others Vs ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-22-2011
Oral Order (APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988) I.M. Quddusi, J. 1. This appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 25-02-2009 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (F.T.C.), Rajnandgaon (for short `the Tribunal) in Claim Case No.43/2009 by the appellants, dismissing the claim petition on the ground that since the injured/claimant has died his legal heirs have no right to substitution as claimants. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 06-02-2007 at about 7-30 P.M., claimant Hukum Lal Sahu (hereinafter referred to as `the claimant') was going on his motorcycle to Gidhva. On the way, between Somni Baigatola to Navagaon Road, one Jeep bearing registration No. C.G. 07/ZA 0988 being driven by respondent No.1 (Rajesh Sahu) in a rash and negligent manner dashed the claimant, as a result of which the claimant sustained injuries on his right leg and above knee. The report of the incident was given to the Police Station Somni. 3. The injured/cla...
Ramsharan Ramvagas Lohar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-22-2011
RADHE SHYAM SHARMA, J. 1.This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16-11-1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti. District Bilaspur, Camp Janjgir in Session Trial No. 338/93. By the impugned judgment, appellant Ramsharan has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: Father of the appellant purchased a piece of land from Vishali Kewant, grandfather of the deceased Jethuram on 24-2-1949 and took possession of the land. Mutation was not done in favour of the purchaser. When the appellant’s father had left the village, the deceased started cultivating the land. After few years, when the appellant came back and tried to get back possession of the land, the deceased did not allow him to take the possession. On this account, a quarrel took place between them on 6-8-1993. On 21-8-1993, at about 11 p.m., when the deceased was coming back from his duty, at...
Joy Minocha and Others Vs. Vijay Kumar and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-21-2011
I.M.QUDDUSI, J. 1. This X Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (C.G.) has passed two separate awards on 28-6-2005 in Claim Case Nos.34/2005 and 35/2005 respectively whereby the claim petitions of the appellants have been dismissed, against which the instant appeals have been filed. M.A.No.1174/2005 relates to Claim Case No.34/2004 and M.A.No.1175/2005 relates to Claim Case No.35/2005. Since both these appeals arise out the same accident met with Tata Sumo bearing Regn.No.M.P.23-LA/1827, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Brief facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that appellant No.1 Smt. Joy Minocha was daughter of deceased persons Naresh Arora and Smt. Bharti Arora, Appellants No.2 and 3 are minor children of appellant No.1. On 6-4-2001 the deceased persons along with others had gone to Bastar by Tata Sumo bearing Regn.No.M.P.23-L.A./1827. On 7-4-2011 when they were coming back to Raipur, the said vehicle which was being driven by respondent No.1 Vijay Kumar ...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Neera Bai and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-21-2011
Oral Order 1. By this common order, M.A.(C) No. 904/2009 and M.A.(C) No.905/2009 are being disposed of as the same are arising out of same accident. 2. These are insurance appeals against the award dated 19.3.2009 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Labour Court, Korba (for short `the Commissioner') in case No. 45/WCAct/08 F and 46/WCAct/08 F. 3. Aforesaid appeals were admitted for hearing on 30.09.2010 on the following substantial questions of law: "(1.) Whether the insurance company is responsible for payment of compensation without paying premium for any labour? (2.) Whether the tractor was used against the terms and conditions of the policy? If yes, then how the insurance company is responsible?" 4. As against Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- claimed as compensation in case No. 45/WCAct/08 F and that of case No.46/WCAct/08 F by respondents No.1 to 5/claimants (in both cases) for the death of Govind Ram and Samaar Singh Patel arising out of and in the course of em...
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. Raigarh (Cg) Vs. Keshav Agrawal and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. M.A.Nos.208/2006, 218/2006 and M.A.No.948/2005 are being disposed of by this common order as all three appeals arise out of same accident. 2. The appellant/Oriental Insurance Company Limited is before us aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award dated 25th April, 2005 passed in Claim Case Nos.116/2004 and 118/2004 whereby and whereunder awards have been passed awarding compensation in favour of the claimants fastening liability of payment of compensation on the appellant/Oriental Insurance Company Limited. Appellants in M.A.No.948/2005 are the claimants in Claim Case No.118/2004 seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation award by the 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raigarh. 3. Facts of the case in brief are as under: (i) The accident took place on 7-6-2002 when deceased Vijay Kumar Agrawal and Suresh shah along with other deceased/injured persons were travelling in Truck bearing registration No.C.G.13/ZC/0322 (Old No.M.B.L.6296). Indisputably, it was a goods ve...
Seeta Patel and Others Vs. Pradeep Kumar Naik and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-19-2011
(APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT) N.K. Agarwal, J. 1. This is claimants' appeal seeking enhancement in the award dated 29.12.2006, passed by the Chief Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short `the Tribunal') in claim case No. 114/2006. 2. As against Rs. 35,25,000/- claimed by unfortunate wife, minor child and mother and father of deceased Shobharam Patel as compensation for the death of deceased in the motor accident, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,51,400/- against the respondents holding them jointly and severally responsible for its payment along with interest @ 6 percent per annum from the date of application till its actual payment. 3. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, held : the accident had occurred due to compost negligence of driver of Jeep and driver of unknown Truck, both drivers equally contributed to the cause of accident i.e. each to the extent of 50 percent; insurance company liable for payment of compensatio...
Rajesh Kumar Choudhari Vs. Darshansingh Sardar and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-19-2011
1. By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged legality and propriety of the order dated 20-7-2010 passed by the Civil Judge Class-II, Jagdalpur in Civil Suit No.55A/2007, whereby the application for amendment filed under Order 6, Rule 17 of the CPC on behalf of the petitioner herein for alternate relief has been dismissed by the said Court. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned, copy of the plaint, copy of the application filed under Order 2. Rule 2(3) of the CPC and copy of the application filed under Order 6, Rule 17 of the CPC. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially suit claiming following reliefs has been filed on behalf of the petitioner herein, on the basis of agreement to sale dated 8-6-2007: (Vernacular matter omitted…..Ed.) Thereafter, by filing application under Order 2, Rule 2(3) of the CPC, the petitioner has prayed for grant of permission to claim reli...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »