Madhya Pradesh Court December 1987 Judgments
Vilayat HussaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1987
Reported in: 1997(95)ELT19(MP)
P.C. Pathak, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the impugned order dated 22-9-1980 (Annexure P-9), recovery proceedings in pursuance of the notice (Annexure P-3) and proceedings in Criminal Case No. 3068 of 1981.2. The petitioner is a warehouse licensee for storage of non-duty paid un-manufactured tobacco. He has his godowns in Millinoniganj, Jabalpur. The petitioner alleges that when he had gone to Gujarat for purchase of tobacco, the Central Excise Preventive Officer and local Central Excise Officers visited the warehouse and sealed all the five godowns on 29-5-1978 vide Annexure R/6. The stock of all the five godowns were checked between 5-7-1978 and 21-10-1978 except from 7-8-1978 to 13-8-1978 and 25-8-1978 to 27-9-1978 and was seized as per Panchanama Annexures R/11 to R/65.3. A show cause notice dated 2-1-1979 (Annexure P/7) was served on the petitioner requiring him to show cause to the Collector, Central Excise as to why...
Tag this Judgment!Uttam Singh and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP199
ORDER1. We have heard counsel on the question of maintainability of the appeal. Shri Mittal submits that the view taken by us is in direct conflict with the view taken by other High Courts and he has cited two decisions in that regard. 2. Shanti Devi's case is one which is reported in AIR 1972 Punj & Har 65 (FB) while the other case is that of Delhi Municipality which is reported in AIR 1970 Delhi 37 (FB). In both cases the only point which their Lordships considered was interpretation of the word 'Judgment' which occurs in Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The law which was not placed before their Lordships is that which we considered in L.P. A. No. 5 of 1987 (reported in 1988 MPLJ 78) (Shrimant Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia v. Shrimant Maharaja Madhaorao Scindia). That has rather paramount importance to the question of maintainability of the instant appeal. The question indeed is, whether the scope of the statutory right of appeal can be enlarged by a subordinate legislation or even in a...
Tag this Judgment!Mandsaur Transport Association Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-15-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP159; 1988MPLJ773
Qureshi, J.1. Mandsaur Transport Association, a Non-Trading Corporation, registered under the M.P. Non-Trading Corporation Act, 1962, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the State of Madhya Pradesh and their officers who are respondents 2, 3 and 4 and againsl respondent No. 5 who is contractor and who collects toll tax on Shivna Bridge, Mandsaur. According to the petitioner they own buses, trucks and other motor vehicles which have to pass through various roads and bridges during the course of business of transport and the public at large travels in the buses. Therefore, they have filed this petition in the interest of the general public, travelling in their vehicles through the Shivna Bridge at Mandsaur including these who are members of the petitioner-association. In the Mandsaur town, the Government of Madhya Pradesh has built a bridge on the river Shivna. The cost of the construction of the bridge was Rs. 26,58,955.00. Since the date of th...
Tag this Judgment!Rajak and ors. Vs. National thermal Power Corporation Ltd., Indore and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP172
R.K. Varma, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, filed by the petitioners, residents of village Banjari Tahsil and District Indore, who are Bhumiswamis in respect of agricultural lands across which the respondent No. 1 National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd., (for short NTPC), a Generaling-Company, is said to be laying over-head lines for transmission of electrical energy and putting up towers for support of those lines. By this petition, the petitioners seek a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from encroaching upon the fields of the petitioners and from putting up any erection or laying any overhead lines thereon.2. According to the averments in the petition, the case of the petitioners is that the petitioners intend to establish a housing colony in the aforesaid land and formalities regarding establishment of a colony are almost complete. The respondent NTPC has no authority to lay down overhead lines or erect towers for the same in the f...
Tag this Judgment!Santokh Singh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1583
Ram Murti Rustogi, J.1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 1979,Darshan Singh v.State of Madhya Pradesh, as both the appeals arise i out of the same incident.2. The four appellants Santokh Singh, Bahadur Singh, Nirmal Singh and Darshan Singh, have come up in appeal against their conviction and sentences awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind, by his judgment, dated 31-1- 1979, in Sessions Trial No. 65/1978, whereby the appellant Darshan Singh has been sentenced under Section 302, Penal Code, to surfer life imprisonment for the murder of Tek Singh. The four appellants have been sentenced to suffer five years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 307/34, IPC, for attempting to murder Charan Singh (P.W. 13). Appellant Darshan Singh has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 25(l)(a) of the Arms Act. All the sentences are to run concurrently. The three appellants Santokh Singh, Bahadur Singh and...
Tag this Judgment!Lachiyabai Vs. Darshan Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1987
Reported in: AIR1989MP118
T.N. Singh, J. 1. The claimantcomes from a rural background. She used toearn her livelihood as a daily labourer.Because she suffered a serious injury which left her cripple, she lodged a claim underSection 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, forshort, the Act, for compensation. Theapplication was duly entertained by the MotorAccident Claims Tribunal, Guna, for short,the Tribunal. The vehicle was self-driven andthe owner filed written statement, butadmitted position also is that he did not enterinto the witness box. The insurance Companywas also impleaded, but filed no written statement and even did not examine anywitness in support of its case. 2. We are indeed not amused at all, butare rather taken aback reading the impugned award. There is a discussion on merit on all aspects of the claim and findings are recorded on the material questions and yet, holding the application to be time-barred, the claim was rejected. One material finding which is assailed seriously in this appeal, we ...
Tag this Judgment!Lachiyabai Vs. Darshansingh Punjabi and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1987
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC160
T.N. Singh, J.1. The claimant comes from a rural background. She used to earn her livelihood as a daily labourer. Because she suffered a serious injury which left her crippled, she lodged a claim Under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, (for short 'the Act') for compensation. The application was duly entertained by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Guna, (for short, 'the Tribunal'). The vehicle was self-driven and the owner filed written statement, but admitted position also is that he did not enter into the witness box. The insurance company was also impleaded, but filed no written statement and even did not examine any witness in support of its case.2. We are indeed not amused at all, but are rather taken aback reading the impugned award. There is a discussion on merit on all aspects of the claim and findings are recorded on the material questions and yet, holding the application to be time-barred, the claim was rejected. One material finding which is assailed seriousl...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Virendra Kumar Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1987
Reported in: I(1988)ACC453
B.M. Lall, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of the Cross-Objection filed by the Respondent for enhancement of the Award.2. This appeal is directed against the award dated 2412-1984 whereby the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Seoni (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) has granted compensation to the Respondent to the extent of Rs. 20,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the application till realisation.3. The Respondent/claimant filed a Claim Petition for damages amounting to Rs. 50,000/- towards bodily pain. He also claimed loss of earning and for his sufferings on account of the accident. His case is that on 31-12-1981 when he was travelling in the bus belonging to the appellant it met with an accident dashing against a standing truck and in the said accident he sustained multiple injuries on his person. It is alleged that the bus was being driven rashly and negligently. The respondent was admitted in the hospital on 1-1-1982 and he remained there fo...
Tag this Judgment!BenzmIn Vs. Rundbhai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: AIR1989MP25; 1988MPLJ500
Faizan Uddin, J. 1. This is a reference made by the learned District Judge, Hoshangabad for confirmation of decree of judicial separation under Section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') passed in Matrimonial Civil Suit No. 38-A of 1986.2. The petitioner and respondent were married according to the Christian religion in the Methodist Church of Igatpuri on 15-5-1963. Both lived together happily as husband and wife till May, 1964 at Harda. Since the respondent wife was in the family way and the petitioner was transferred from Harda to Itarsi, the respondent went to her parents at Igatpuri and stayed with them. The respondent gave birth to a female child named Margret. According to the petitioner husband, he made concerted efforts to bring back his respondent wife and his daughter Margret to his place but she did not turn up as she had taken up a job as Assistant Teacher in Marathi Girls School, Igatpuri. His daughter Margret committed suicide in Mar...
Tag this Judgment!Mangilal Vs. M.P.S.R.T.C., Bhopal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP109; [1990]67CompCas191(MP)
R.K. Varma, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimant, son of the deceased against the award dl. 31-10-1984 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shajapur in Claim Case No. 12/83 whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows : --On 20-10-1982 the deceased Bhojraj was intending to travel as a passenger in the Guna-Ujjain Passenger Bus bearing registration No. CPH-8594 belonging to the respondent MP State Road Transport Corporation and while the bus in question was standing at the bus-stand in village Moman-Badodiya which is on Guna-Ujjain route, the luggage of deceased Bhojraj was put on the top of the bus and in order to check that luggage the deceased Bhojraj climbed up the ladder affixed to the rear portion of the bus. While the deceased was so climbing up, the ladder gave way and the deceased fell down on the ground, sustaining serious injuries which ultimately resulted in his death in...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »