Madhya Pradesh Court February 1987 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.
Firm Chhunilal Laxman Prasad Vs. Agarwal and Co. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-1987
Reported in: 1987MPLJ165
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. An appeal was preferred to this court by the respondents against an order of the trial court allowing an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the C. P. C. A Learned single Judge of this Court, by his order dated 28-3-86, reversed the order of the trial Court and dismissed the application made by the appellant. It is against this order that the present L. P. A. has been preferred.2. A preliminary objection has been raised by counsel for the respondents that this appeal is not maintainable. In support of this objection, reliance has been placed on the decision of a D. B. of this Court in (Shri Kunwarji Sonker v. Nirmalchand Sonkar L. P. A. No. 151/85 D/- on 17-1-1986. Counsel for the appellant urged that the view taken inthe aforesaid L. P. A. is in the teeth of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania, AIR 1981 SC 1786, and as such, cannot be taken to be good law. It is not a case where the decision of the Supreme Court supra...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Sardarmal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: AIR1987MP156
1. This second appeal, by the State Government, arises out of the appellate judgment and decree dt. 14-3-1978, passed by the Addl. District Judge, Ratlam, in Civil Regular Appeal No. 534 of 1976.2. Respondent is a teacher. He instituted a suit for declaration that he was entitled to the salary of a trained graduate teacher from June, 1963, as he had acquired the requisite qualification at that time. The suit was filed in the year, 1971.3. Defendant-appellant-State resisted the suit and prayed for its dismissal. Trial Court dismissed the same, while the lower appellate Court decreed the suit declaring the plaintiff-respondent to be entitled to the salary, as claimed by him.4. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law :'Whether, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned lower appellate Court has correctly decided the case in accordance with law?'5. Two points have been raised by Shri Jain, learned Dy. Government Advocate, appearing for t...
Yogeshwar and ors. Vs. Laxminarayan Agrawal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1987
Reported in: AIR1987MP190; 1987MPLJ163
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Raigarh dated 23-3-83 in C.S. No. 7-B/82, one Bimadhar preferred first appeal No. 75/83 in this Court. Bimadhar, the sole appellant, died during the pendency of the appeal, but no application was made by his L.Rs. for substitution within the period prescribed for the purpose. A belated application was. however, made by the L.Rs. of Bimadhar who are the appellant before us in the present L.P.A. for being substituted in place of Bimadhar and for setting aside the abatement. This application was rejected by a learned single Judge of this Court by his order dated 16-7-86 on the ground that no case for condonaton of delay had been made out. After holding that the appeal had abated, the learned single Judge proceeded to pass an order directing the appeal to be dismissed assuch. The present appeal has been preferred against this order dated 16-7-86.2. An objection has been rai...
Jabalpur Municipal Corporation Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-1987
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ912MP; 1987MPLJ473
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the Jabalpur Municipal Corporation challenging the order dated 9th December, 1986 (Annexure-D) passed by respondent No. 1 whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay 75% of the salary payable to respondent No. 2 as subsistence allowance. The facts in a nutshell relevant for determination of the writ petition are that respondent No. 2 is an employee of the petitioner. He was suspended admittedly more than six months prior to passing of the impugned order. He made an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for a direction to the petitioner to pay to him subsistence allowance calculated at the rate of 75% of the salary. This application has been allowed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jabalpur, respondent No. 1. It has been urged by the counsel for the petitioner and has not been disputed by counsel either for respondent No. 1 or for respondent No. 2 who too is r...
Surendra Singh Chauhan Vs. Mamta Chouhan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-1987
Reported in: II(1990)DMC208
Gulab C. Gupta, J.1. This is husband's appeal, filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30th April, 1984, passed by II Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 31-A of 1983.2. The parties are legally married husband and wife and have a son born to them out of this wedlock. The appellant, in his application filed under Section 13 of the Act, prayed for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion by the respondent. It was alleged in the said application that the respondent is of a quarrelsome nature and lived with the appellant only for about 4 months in a period of 2-1/2 years. Even during this period, it was alleged, the respondent created problems by treating with cruelty the infant son and other members of the family. It was also alleged that the respondent once tried to throw the infant child into a well and also tried to burn h...
Surendra Singh Chauhan Vs. Mamta Chauhan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-1987
Reported in: I(1990)DMC227
Gulab C. Gupta, J.1. This is husband's appeal, filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30th April, 1984, passed by II Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 31-A of 1983.2. The parties are legally married husband and wife and have a son born to them out of this wedlock. The appellant, in his application filed under Section 13 of the Act, prayed for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion by the respondent. It was alleged in the said application that the respondent is of a quarrelsome nature and lived with the appellant only for about 4 months in a period of 2-1/2 years. Even during this period, it was alleged, the respondent created problems by treating with cruelty the infant son and other members of the family. It was also alleged that the respondent once tried to throw the infant child into a well and also tried to burn h...
Babulal Lodhi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1709
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. Petitioner by Shri Masood Ali. He is heard.2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of a tractor and a trolley which were seized by a Range Officer in exercise of powers conferred by the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The petitioner made an application before the Judicial Magistrate Sagar purporting to be under Section 457 of the Cr. P. Code for the release of the said tractor and trolley. This application was dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate on 10-1-1987. Aggrieved by that order, the petitioner has instituted this writ petition with a prayer for quashing the aforesaid order dated 10-1-1987 and for direction to the respondents to release the tractor and the trolley.3. Having heard counsel for the petitioner, we are of the opinion that the application which was made by the petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate under Section 457 of Cr. P. C. was not maintainable and the Magistrate did not have any jurisdiction to entertain the said application which was clear...
Mahesh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1380
Faizan Uddin, J.1. The judgment delivered in this appeal. will also govern the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 1404 of 1985 (Ramnarayan v. The State of M. P.) as well as Criminal Reference No. 7 of 1985 made by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar for confirmation of death sentence awarded to the two appellants Mahesh and Ramnarayan in Sessions Trial Nos. 169/84, 170/84, 171/84/, 172/84 and 173 of 1984 decided by the common judgment dt. 30th Nov., 1985.2. In Criminal Appeal No. 1403 of 1985, appellant Mahesh has challenged his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code for which he has been awarded death sentence in the Sessions Trials referred to above. In Criminal Appeal No. 1404 of 1985 Ramnarayan who is the father of appellant Mahesh has challenged his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code for which he has also been awarded death sentence in the said Sessions Trials which were all consolidated for the purposes of evidence a...
Mst. Pratapi and ors. Vs. Balkishan and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-1987
Reported in: AIR1988MP125
T.N. Singh, J. 1. This is defendant's appeal, who has lost in two Courts below. I have heard extensively counsel for both sides in this matter because I wanted to be sure both on facts and on law to consider appellants' grievance that Courts below have erroneously decreed the suit.2. It is not disputed that the suit land belonged originally to one Dulichand, who died in 1949. His widow Shyamkunwar and two daughters, Parvatibai and Rambati bai, survived him. It has come in evidence that Shyamkunwar died in the year 1959 and during her lifetime she adopted Parvatibai's son Balkishan, the plaintiff-respondent. Indeed, the transaction is evidenced by a registered deed dated 31-3-1958, proved as Ex.P. 1 in the suit. The position in law is also that the Hindu Succession Act was made applicable in Madhya Pradesh in the year 1961 and any devolution of interest in agricultural land prior to 1961, as in the instant case, could take place only in accordance with the provisions of Revenue Laws suc...
Girishchandra Vs. Sushilabai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1815
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This revision petition filed by the husband is directed against the revisional order dated 6-1-1986 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Alirajpur in Cr. Revision No 9 of 1985 whereby the order passed by the Judl. Magistrate First Class dismissing the wife's application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') has been set aside and a monthly allowance in the sum of Rs. 200/-has been made.2. Circumstances giving rise to the petition are these. Parties were united in wedlock on 14-6-1982. The living in the conjugal home was not smooth. Ultimately on 5-8-1983 the applicant sent the non-applicant to her parental home at Jobat, Distt. Jhabua and never went there to bring her back.3. The non-applicant filed an application under Section 125 of the Code on 1-11-1983 alleging that prior to sending her to her parental home the petitioner had taken her to the advocates and a doctor with a view to divorce her and had been ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »