Chhattisgarh Court July 2014 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.
Satish Chandra Dwivedi Vs. Manju Dwivedi and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
1. Common questions of law arises for consideration in these revisions, were heard analogously and shall stand disposed of by this common order. 2. The imperative facts required for judging the correctness of the impugned order are as under:- 2.1 Non-applicant No.1-Smt. Manju Dwivedi was married to applicant on 28.4.1996 as per Hindu rights and customs and out of their wedlock, non-applicant No. 2-Naman born on 28.07.1997 at Bilaspur. 2.2 It is the case of the non-applicant No.1 that after the marriage when she became pregnant. applicant started harassing her on account of demand of dowry and other means, by which she was forced to leave her matrimonial house and then she came to her parental house along with her minor son Naman and, thereafter the applicant did not take care of her and neglected to maintain them, leading to filing of the application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 18.01.2001 before the Family Court, Bilaspur-. 2.3 The present applicant filed his...
Shobhanath Vs. Sukhmaniya and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-28-2014
1. Invoking revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Cr.P.C.), sole applicant- Shobhnath has filed this revision calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 11.04.2007, passed by Family Court, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja in Misc. Case No.96/06 rejecting his application filed under proviso to Section 126(2)of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code). 2. The core facts required for adjudication of this revision are as under: 2.1 Non-applicant Nos. 1 and 2, being the wife and daughter of applicant-Shobhnath, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code) before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur, being registered as Misc. Criminal Case No. 306/2003, in which the learned Magistrate said to have issued summons to the present applicant for his appearance before that Court, but despite service of summons, he failed...
Ajit Kumar Vs. Kirti Bai
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-28-2014
1. In a proceeding initiated under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (henceforth Cr.P.C.) by non-applicant Kirti Bai claiming an allowance for maintenance from her son applicant Ajit Kumar, the Family Court, Ambikapur, by impugned, order dated 26-8-2011 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 80 of 2008, granted an allowance of Rs. 1,200 per month for maintenance from 17-7-2008, i.e. the date of filing the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. by the mother. 2. Shri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/son would submit that the monthly allowance for maintenance granted at the rate of Rs. 1,200 per month from the date of the application is contrary to Section 125(2). Cr.P.C. as no special reason has been recorded for granting the allowance for maintenance from the date of the application. He would also impugn the quantum of the allowance granted to the non-applicant/mother for maintenance. 3. On the other hand, Shri Shakti Raj Sinha, learne...
Vidya Devi Sharma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-25-2014
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Original petitioner J.P. Sharma now represented by his legal heir Smt. Vidyadevi Sharma, has assailed the legality and validity of the order Annexure A/10 dated 24/06/1987, the order Annexure A/16 dated 21/11/1994 and the appellate authoritys order Annexure A/17 dated 07/02/1996. By Annexure A/10 the original petitioner was visited with penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect and by order Annexure A/17 his appeal against this order was dismissed as barred by limitation. By order Annexure A/16 the Divisional Deputy Director, Tribal Development, Bilaspur Division directed recovery of a sum of Rs.60,508/- from the gratuity amount of the original petitioner on the ground that the said amount was the excess payment made to him during the period 01/03/1983 to 31/01/1994. 3. It is mentioned in the order Annexure A/10 that the petitioner remained absent from duty without obtaining leave, therefore, he should show cause as to why ...
Vishal Jindal and Others Vs. Puja Jindal and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-23-2014
1. Questioning the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment dated 04/12/2012 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 28/2012, the applicants herein have filed this criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called as Cr.P.C.), by which, their appeal filed under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter called as Act of 2005) has been dismissed. 2. The core facts required for judging the correctness of the impugned judgment are as under.- 2.1 Smt. Puja Jindal/non-applicant No. 1 herein filed an application under Section 12 of the Act of 2005 seeking reliefs as provided under Sections 18, 19 and 20 of Act of 2005, as she is wife of the applicant No. 1. The said application was filed on 27/03/2012. The jurisdictional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raigarh issued notice to the present applicants for their appearance before the said C...
Bhartiya State Bank Vs. Bhanjan Singh and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-22-2014
1. This is an appeal filed by the Bank against the judgment and decree dated 14.05.1999 passed in Civil Suit No.34-A/1999 by the Court of Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, whereby the suit filed by the Bank was dismissed as barred by limitation. 2. According to the plaint allegations, the deceased Ramu Singh Thakur had applied to the Bank to obtain the loan under the agricultural heads. It was also pleaded that different documents were executed and further the repayment of loan was further secured by the guarantor and a deed of guarantee was also executed by one Badri Prasad Agrawal. After examining the documents and application, the Bank sanctioned the loan to the borrower under different heads and loan Rs.40,000/- was for tubewell, Rs.12,000/- for fencing of the field and Rs.14,000/- for the crops. Thereby, in all, total loan of Rs.66,000/- was sanctioned. 3. As per the pleadings, the loan was sanctioned after execution of the necessary documents on 19.02.1990 and the interest was...
Sarfaraj Ahmed Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-22-2014
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 1. The petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 13-1-2011 (Annexure P/7) passed by the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Jashpur, whereby his application for grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected. 2. At the time of death i.e. on 28-7-2004 the petitioner's father namely; Syed Sajjad Ahmed was working as Driver in the office of the Community Health Center, Jashpurnagar. At that time the petitioner was minor. He passed 10th class examination in June, 2009 and thereafter, moved applications for grant of compassionate appointment on 7-9-2009 and 10-9-2009. The petitioner also passed Class XII examination in October, 2011. The petitioner submitted representation on 21-3-2012. His earlier writ petition, bearing WP (S) No.1540 of 2013, was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 14- 6-2013 with liberty to file a proper petition challenging the order of rejection of his claim for compassionate appointment. 3. Learned counsel for ...
Ajuram Vs. Shatruhari Sahu and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-18-2014
Oral Order: Heard. 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred against order dated 26/12/12 by which the Election Tribunal has allowed the election petition filed by respondent No.1 declaring the election of the petitioner / returned candidate void. 2. Brief resumption of relevant facts necessary for decision of the petition are that election to the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat-Chilfi was conducted on 31/01/10 under the provisions of C.G. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short "Panchayat Act") and C.G. Panchayats (Election Petitions, Corrupt Practices and Disqualification for Membership) Rules, 1995(for short "Panchayat Election Petitions Rules"). In the said election, the petitioner was declared having received highest number of votes i.e. 297 amongst all the candidates including respondents.Thereafter, the petitioner was declared elected and declaration to that effect was issued in favour of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the election of the pet...
P.K. Kumra Vs. President, Smriti Grih Nirman Sahkari Samiti Maryadit a ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-18-2014
Oral Order: 1. Invoking appellate jurisdiction of this Court under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short "the Code"), the plaintiff appellant has called in question the validity of the judgment and decree dated 22nd December, 2008 passed by the Court of 11th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Durg in Civil Suit No.6-A/2008. 2. Brief facts which are involved in this case are that a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and for recovery was filed by the plaintiff appellant wherein it was pleaded that the cancellation affected in respect of sale deed was executed by Smriti Grih Nirman Cooperative Society (henceforth called as "Society"), in respect of plot No. B/473, in favour of plaintiff/appellant be declared void thereby declaration be further made that the sale deed dated 6.2.1985 be held valid and consequently the possession was also valid. The dispute was with respect to Plot No. B-473 situated at Smrithi Nagar, Bhilai. According to the plaint allegations, the appe...
Madhuri Wankhede Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-17-2014
1. In the instant petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.03.2014 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Dhamtari in Special Sessions Trial No. 3/13. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner who is a senior Medical Officer at district hospital, Dhamtari was a witness in the aforesaid Sessions trial case and she as a witness was summoned to giver her evidence before the trial Court on 09.05.2013 but on account of some emergency duty at the hospital, she could not appear before the Court and moved an application for exemption of her appearance on the said date. Therefore, fresh summon was issued securing her appearance on 10.06.2013 on which date the petitioner appeared before the Court below but her statement could not be recorded because there was a condolence on account of the death of a member of the Bar. Subsequently, again fresh summon was issued for her appearance before the tr...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »