Chhattisgarh Court January 2013 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.
Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Surguja (C.G.) Vs. Nandkeshwar Go ...
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Jan-30-2013
V.K. Patil, Member, J. 1. This order will govern disposal of appeal nos. FA/12/48 and FA/12/49, preferred by the appellants herein, who were respectively OP and complainant, in the complaint case no. 114/2011 filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Surguja, Ambikapur (hereinafter called District Forum for short), whereby complaint of the complainant was partly allowed by order dated 05.01.2012, directing OP Bank to return the tractor and trolley to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.5,000/towards mental and physical harassment and also to pay cost of litigation Rs.1,000/. OP was also directed that since the tractor and trolley were kept in its possession for long time without getting order from a competent court, so it should bear further installments and interest as per document D 1(6). It was also directed that OP would adjust Rs.4,000/in the account of the complainant, being the amount of compensation as awarded in para 10(2) and 10(3) of the order. H...
Vijay Kumar Dhruv Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
T.P. Sharma, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28-12-2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, Raipur, in S.T.No.314/2005, whereby and whereunder after holding the appellant guilty for causing homicidal death amounting to murder of his brother Nandlal convicted him under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.1 for one year. 2. Conviction is impugned on the ground that without there being any iota of evidence, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned and thereby committed illegality. 3. As per case of the prosecution, on the fateful day of 30-3-2005 at about 8 p.m., appellant assaulted his brother Nandlal by wooden plank over his head, Nandlal fell down and became unconscious, he was shifted to Dr. Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur for treatment, he was treated and lastly he died on 4-4-2005. Merg was rec...
Ramsurat Alias Surta Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-23-2013
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 5-7-1996 passed by Additional Special Judge, Ambikapur, District Sarguja in Special Case No.81/1994 convicting the accused/appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 342 and 376(2)(g), IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for one year u/s. 342 and RI for ten years with fine of Rs. 1000/- u/s. 376(2)(g), IPC, plus default stipulations. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that on 22-4-1994 FIR Ex. P-6 was lodged by the prosecutrix a married lady aged about 18 years alleging that on 21-4-1994 at about 4 p.m. when she was returning from the house of her father, on the way accused/appellant herein and co-accused Rajendra apprehended her and made certain inquiry from her. Accused/appellant caught hold of her hand whereas co-accused gagged her mouth with shawl. It is alleged that the accused persons took her to a nearby tree with an intention to outrage her modesty but as at that time two persons namely Baua Ahir a...
Pradeep Kumar Shrivastava Vs. Sairam Automobiles and Services Pvt. Ltd ...
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
S. C. Vyas, President 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 27.04.12, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (hereinafter called District Forum for short) in complaint case No.169/2011, whereby the complaint of the appellant herein was partly allowed and the OPs / respondents have been directed to pay Rs.6,500/jointly or severally along with interest @ 7 % p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint and also to pay Rs.1,000/as compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,000/as cost of litigation. The prayer for refund of cost price on account of unfair trade practice of the respondents was not allowed and therefore this appeal has been preferred for enhancement of the awarded amount by allowing the aforesaid prayer also. 2. It is not in dispute that respondent No.1 Sairam Automobiles and Services Pvt. Ltd. is the authorized dealer of Tata Motors at Bhilai, District Durg and respondent No.2 is the manufacturer of Tata Indica Vista Aura Quadrajet ABS model car, ...
Kaushal Prasad Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 23-12-2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge. Janjgir in Criminal Appeal No.114/1998 affirming the judgment and order dated 28-4-1998 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Janjgir in Criminal Case No. 253/1994 convicting the accused/applicant under Section 304-A, IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for six months and pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to, further undergo SI for one month. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that on 22-3-1994 FIR Ex.P-2 was lodged by Punudas (PW-3) alleging that on that day when Maituram Gond was exploding rocks in the mine under the lease granted to Punudas by virtue of being deployed by the accused /applicant, he met with an accident. Based on this report, offence under Section 304-A, IPC was registered against the applicant and post moretm examination on the body of deceased was conducted on 22-3-1994 itself vide Ex. P-5 by Dr. S. R. Tharwani (PW-11) and accordi...
Tata Motors Finance Ltd. and Another Vs. Bishan Lal Patkar
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Jan-14-2013
V.K. Patil, Member 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 19.06.2012 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (herein after referred for short as District Forum) in Complaint Case No.178/2011, whereby complaint of the complainant, alleging deficiency in service against OP finance company owing to repossession of his vehicle, was allowed directing OP to pay compensation of Rs.1,01,680/- towards loss of income along with interest @ 6% p.a. from 30.04.2011 and also to pay the sale price of the questioned vehicle Rs.80,000/- with interest @ 6% from the date of filing complaint. OP was also directed to pay Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and cost of litigation Rs.2,000/-. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the complainant had purchased a Tata AC Van having registration no.C.G.04/JA3707,cost of which was Rs.2,40,895/-. Complainant had paid Rs.30,895/- as margin money and balance amount Rs.2,10,000/- was got financed from OP No.2 which was the zonal office of O...
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Ramprasad and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Jan-14-2013
S.C. Vyas, President. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 14.08.2012 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Koriya, Baikunthpur (C.G.) (hereinafter called District Forum for short) in Complaint Case No.34/2012, whereby the appellant/Insurance Company, has been directed to pay Rs.4,28,702/to the respondent no.1/complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of claim till date of payment and also to pay Rs.2,000/as cost of litigation. 2. In nutshell, the facts of the case are that tractor having engine No.N.G.N.L.1465 and chassis No.N.G.N.L.1465 was purchased by the complainant from the dealer/respondent No.2 and thereafter was got insured from the appellant/Insurance Company, for a period between 19.11.2010 to 18.11.2011. The said tractor was stolen by someone in the night intervening between 22.09.2011 to 23.09.2011. Police was intimated on 23.09.2011 and thereafter the Insurance Company was intimated by fax on 05.10.2011 and by registered post on 07.10.2011...
Laxmi Narayan Pandey Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-14-2013
1. Heard. This order shall dispose off the above three writ petitions which arise out of common grounds of law based on similar facts. 2. Brief resumption of necessary and relevant facts for decision of this petitions are that the petitioners at the relevant time were posted and working as Head Constable and Constable in the Rakshit Kendra Raipur. Along with them, there were other Constables, Head Constable who were in charge and entrusted with duty. It is alleged that one accused absconded from the custody of the police and according to respondents, those petitioners and other police officer who were on duty, were responsible for this serious lapse and negligence of duty. 3. Vide order dated 10.6.1992, Superintendent of Police, Raipur, instituted common disciplinary proceedings against petitioners Lakshmi Narayan Pandey, Ramendra Mishra and Akshay Kumar along with some more police officials. The inquiry culminated in imposition of penalty of dismissal from service vide order dated 23....
Kawasi Joga Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jan-14-2013
T.P. Sharma, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18-3-2005 passed in S.T.No.183/04 whereby and whereunder the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur after holdings the appellant guilty for causing homicidal death amounting to murder of deceased Benjami Durjan and disappearance of evidence of a criminal case, convicted him under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for life and fine of Rs.500/- and R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo R.I. for one month on each default. 2. Conviction is impugned on the ground that without an iota of evidence the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned and thereby committed illegality. 3. As per case of the prosecution, on 8-5-2004 the appellant took Benjami Durjan (since deceased) on his bicycle and thereafter the deceased did not return alive and his dead body was recovered after 10-11 days. When the appellan...
Chainsukh Parakh Vs. Divisional Manager,oriental Insurance Company Lim ...
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
S.C. Vyas, President. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 26.03.2012 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dhamtari (C.G.), (hereinafter called District Forum for short) in Complaint Case No.25/2011,, whereby the complaint of the appellant herein, has been partly allowed and respondent/Insurance Company has been directed to pay Rs.29,535/, if discharge voucher after signing, is sent by the complainant to it. It has further been directed by the District Forum that repairing bill along with supplementary estimates of the insured vehicle, be sent back by the Insurance Company to the Surveyor for reassessment, so that actual damages payable by the Insurance Company, can be assessed. 2. The grievance of the appellant/complaint before us is only this that after passing of the impugned order, the amount of Rs.29,535/, has been paid by the respondent/Insurance Company, but as no interest was awarded by the District Forum on this amount, so no interest has been paid by the r...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »