Madhya Pradesh Court May 1989 Judgments
Bramhanand Vs. Triveni Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-25-1989
Reported in: I(1990)DMC514
Gulab C. Gupta, J.1. This is plaintiff husband's first appeal under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act against the judgment and decree dated 24-4-1986 passed by Shri R.B. Dixit, Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur at Katni in Civil Suit No. 45-A of 1983 dismissing the appellant's suit for divorce with costs and directing the appellant to maintain the respondent-wife by paying Rs. 100/- per month, as maintenance. 2. That the parties were married on 12-3-1981 and the respondent gave birth to a male child on 18-12-1981 are not in dispute. The said child unfortunately died on 19-12-1981. The case of the appellant was that he did not have an opportunity of cohabitation with the respondent for a period of nine months calculated from the date of birth of the male child, which by itself proves that the respondent was the lady of easy virtue. According to him, the child born to the respondent, was not his child. He also complained cruelty on her part against himself and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Lallimal Biharilal and ors. Vs. Rambaboo Vaishya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-22-1989
Reported in: AIR1990MP64
T.N. Singh, J.1. Of the nine, plaintiffs, who describe themselves as members of Gwalior Agrico Dealers' Association, eight have appealed against the verdict rendered in their suit by the trial Court. In the array of defendants/respondents figures several persons, but only as pro forma parties. Defendant/respondent No. 1 Rambaboo Vaishya only filed written statement and contested the suit. 2. Before reference is made to the pleadings, issues, evidence and the impugned judgment, it may be appropriate even at this stage to indicate the brief outline of the controversy, because the trial Court has evidently failed to grapple satisfactorily with the legal complexion of the issues involved. Indeed, there is no reference at all in the impugned judgment to the relevant provisions of the Contract Act, the Sale of Goods Act, or even the general law of Torts on which the foundation of plaintiffs' claim actually rested. Shortly put, the plaintiffs sued the contesting defendant for wrongful detenti...
Tag this Judgment!Kartar Singh and Ors. Vs. Kanhai Singh (deceased by L.R's) and Ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-22-1989
Reported in: AIR1989MP322
T.N. Singh, J. 1. The two appeals were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Misc. First Appeal No. 15/1973 is preferred by the contesting defendants, while Misc. F.A. No. 18/1973 is by the plaintiff, since deceased and represented by his legal representatives.2. On 31-10-1966 plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration, partition and mesne profits in which judgment was rendered on 2-2-1973. Plaintiff's claim was decreed in part. In their appeal (Misc. F.A. No. 15/1973) the contesting defendants have made a grievance not only against the decree passed in favour of the plaintiff but also in favour of defendant 15 by the trial Court.3. The plaintiff came up with a case that in respect of the land of Schedule A of the plaint he was a 'Pakka Krishak' with 'mourusi'rights on the material date, namely, 20-6-1950, and that he was 'Up Krishak' (Shikmi) in respect of Schedule B land, under Gulab Kunwar, admittedly, a widow. On 20-6-1950 Madhya Bharat Model Farmi...
Tag this Judgment!Arun Kumar Vs. Chief Engineer, P.W.D., Bhopal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-1989
Reported in: AIR1989MP288
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution against the respondents seeking the writ of certiorari, mandamus or prohibition directing the respondents to accept the tender of the petitioner in pursuance of the auction conducted by the respondent 3 on 22-3-89-and restraining the respondents from reauctioning the right to collect the toll tax for Khajuria Nala bridge.2. The facts leading to this petition, in short, are that in pursuance to an advertisement published in Nayi Duniya, Indore the respondent No. 3, invited a tender to collect the toll of the bridge constructed over Khajuria Nala at K.M. 64/10 at Ratlam, Gujri Road The toll is to be collected under the Tolls Act, 1851 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). According to the petitioner, the toll is to be collected for recovering the cost, of construction of the bridge. The cost of the construction was estimated at Rs. 38,73,107-The toll tax was to be collected from 1-4-1989 to 1-4-1990 and...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Chhutbai and anr. Vs. Madanlal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-1989
Reported in: AIR1989MP330; 1989MPLJ705
S.K. Dubey, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The material fuels leading to this petition, briefly, are as follows : --The petitioners and respondent 2 Natthu Prasad were the tenants of Prahladdas. Prahlad Das filed a suit for ejectment under Section 12(1)(a),(f) and (g) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, against the petitioner and respondent 2, in the Court of Civil Judge, Class-II, Mhow. Summonses were issued to the petitioners and respondent 2 intimating the date of first hearing as 16th of June, 1965. The summons accompanied with a copy of the plaint was served upon respondent 2 but the summonses on the petitioners were served without the copy of the plaint. On the date fixed, i.e. 16-6-1965, the petitioners did not appear. An ex parte decree was, therefore, passed on 19-6-1965. But Prahlad Das, the decree-holder, continued to realise the rent from the petitioners and respondent 2 for sufficiently long time i.e. for about ...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Lime Manufacturers' Association, Katni and Ors. Vs. State of Madh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-1989
Reported in: AIR1989MP264; 1989MPLJ561
G.G. Sohani, Ag. C.J.1. The order in this case will also govern the disposal of Misc. Petitions Nos. 345/88, 323/83, 4051/87, 3298/87, 3361/87, 3562/87, 3777/87, 3803/87, 3810/87, 3881/87, 3882/87, 498/88, 621/88, 694/88, 942/88, 1122/88, 1253/88, 1278/88, 1290/88, 1229/88, 1423/88, 571/88, 573/88, 1885/88, 4031/88, 4107/88, 3105/88, 198/89, 3714/87 and 171/89.2. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed that the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Upkar Adhiniyam, 1981 (Act No. 1 of 1982) as amended by the Madhya Pradesh (Sanshodhan) Adhiniyam, 1987 (Act No. 21 of 1987) imposing cess on land held in connection with mineral rights be declared as ultra vires. The material facts giving rise to these petitions briefly are as follows :(i) The petitioners hold mining leases under the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as the M.M.R.D. Act. A Mineral Area Development Cess was im...
Tag this Judgment!Ramprasad Ambaram Verma Vs. President, Industrial Court and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-1989
Reported in: (1991)IILLJ488MP; 1989MPLJ797
ORDER1. S. K. Dubey, J:- The petitioner was employed by M.P.S.R.T. Corporation, Indore in its Ratlam Depot The petitioner was dismissed on September 1, 1983 from service without any enquiry. The petitioner filed an application under Section 31 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') against his dismissal in the Labour Court, Indore. The respondent No. 2 denied the allegations made in the application, but stated that under Standard Standing Order 11(a) and (b) the services of the petitioner were dispensed with. The Learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court after recording of the evidence held that the termination of the services was an illegal retrenchment and ordered reinstatement of the petitioner with back wages. Aggrieved by the order of the Labour Court dated August 27, 1984, the respondent-Corporation tiled an appeal before the Industrial Court. After hearing the appeal, the Industrial Court allowed it and set aside the order of reinstatement...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Pharmaceuticals and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-1989
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ473
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This is an application Under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'the Code') for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1068/86 of the Court of Shri P. C. Upadhyaya, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore.2. Circumstances giving rise to the application are these : The applicant No. 1 M/s. Prem Pharmaceuticals, Nenawar Road, Indore is a partnership firm and the applicants 2 to 11 are its partners. They carry on the business of manufacture of intravenous fluid Sodium Chloride injection in their factory at Indore.3. The applicants stand prosecuted in respect of an offence Under Section 18(a)(i) read with Section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act') on the ground that sample of intravenous fluid Sodium Chloride injection manufactured and sold by them was taken on 8-10-1983 from M/s. Gangaram and Sons, Hisar, Haryana, by the Drugs Inspector having jurisdiction under the Act, and on analysis by Government An...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Prakash RubIn Vs. Smt. Sarla Rubin
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-1989
Reported in: AIR1989MP236; 1989MPLJ571
B.C. Varma, J.1. Applicant, Prem Prakash Rubin and non-applicant, Sarla Rubin were duly married according to Christian rites and in the matrimonial matter are governed by the Indian Divorce Act. The applicant's allegation, however, is that after some time of the marriage, the non-applicant completely withdrew herself from the applicant and would not permit him access. This has caused tremendous agony to the applicant and is a cruelty of high order. Thenon-applicant has also deserted the applicant for no good cause and is living separately. Allegations as to adultery have also been made. The non-applicant did not contest. Statement of the applicant Prem Prakash was recorded as witness for himself. In the judgment dated 5-10-1988, the learned Additional District Judge found the allegation as to leading adulterous life not proved. It has, however, been found that the respondent was guilty of cruelly and even attempted to assault the applicant with knife. Further finding is that she has wi...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Gopal Vs. Laxminarayan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-1989
Reported in: AIR1990MP37; 1989MPLJ725
R.K. Verma, J. 1. This is a Misc. Second Appeal under Section 32 of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') filed by the landlord against the order dated 29-11-88 passed by the 1st Additional Judge to the Court of the District Judge, Mandsaur in Misc. Appeal No. 33/88, affirming the order dated 28-10-88 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority in Case No. 2; 88-89, A-90 (4) whereby the Rent Controlling Authority in a case started on the application of the tenants under Section 38 of the Act, has allowed an interim application of the tenants, directing the landlord not to deprive the tenants from enjoyment of essential services of the disputed latrine and bathroom and to remove obstruction created by him. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows: The respondents-tenants Laxminarayan, Dinesh Chandra, Manaklal, Basantrao and Kantilal filed an application under Section 38 of the Act before the Rent Controlling Authority alle...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »