Madhya Pradesh Court January 1990 Judgments
Shrivallabh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-1990
Reported in: 1990MPLJ456
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the 'Code') is for quashing the proceedings in Special Case No. 1 of 1989 in the Court of Special Judge, Jhabua.2. Circumstances giving rise to the application are these holding that the petitioner had accepted bribe from R. S. Mishra, by judgment dated 11-8-1982, the Special Judge, Jhabua convicted him of the offence under section 161, Indian Penal Code and under section 5(1)(a) read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short the 'Act') and had sentenced him to R. I. for 3 months on each count, sentences to run concurrently. Against that judgment the appellant preferred appeal in this Court [ vide Appeal No. 471/82]. By its judgment dated 29-4-1987, this Court holding that there was no valid sanction allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and the sentence.3. By the said judgment the proceedings were quashed and the appellant was dischar...
Tag this Judgment!Alok Pratap Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-1990
Reported in: 1990MPLJ631(SC)
ORDERS.K. Seth, J.1. The District Magistrate, Sarguja vide his order dated 5-6-1989 (Annexure-R/1) directed the detention of the petitioner under sub-section (2) of section 3 of the National Security Act on the ground that it was necessary to do so with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was taken into custody on the same day. The detention order was finally confirmed by the State Government under sub-section (1) of section 12 of the Act on the basis of the report of the Advisory Board on 22-7-1989 (Annexure-R/15). It was specified in the said confirmatory order dated 22-7-1989 that the petitioner would continue to be in detention for a period of twelve months from the date of his detention i.e. upto 4-6-1990. In present petition filed by him under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged his abovesaid detention under the provisions of the National Secu...
Tag this Judgment!Milan Supari Stores Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-1990
Reported in: (1990)82CTR(MP)218; [1990]184ITR106(MP)
A.G. Qureshi, J. 1. This order shall govern the disposal of M.P. No. 317 of 1988 (Milan Supari Stores, Indore v. ITO, 'C' Ward, Indore, and 3 Ors.), M. P. No. 318 of 1988 (Milan Supari Stores, Indore v. ITO, 'C' Ward, Indore, and 4 Ors.) and M. P. No. 420 of 1989 (Milan Supari Stores, Indore v. Asst. CIT, Indore, and 6 Ors.).2. The petitioner in M. P. No. 317 of 1988 is a registered partnership firm known as Milan Supari Stores. Respondent No. 4 in this petition is Sarvottam Supari Stores. The petitioner in M. P. No. 318 of 1988 is also Milan Supari Stores and respondents Nos. 4 and 5 are Sarvottam Supari Stores and Hilman Traders, respectively. The petitioner in M. P. No. 420 of 1989 is also the same firm, i.e., Milan Supari Stores, but respondents Nos. 5, 6 and 7 are Hilman Traders, 12, Daulat Gary, Indore, Sarvottam Supari Stores, 167, Ranipura, Indore, and Hilman Traders, 96, Siyaganj, Indore.3. According to the petitioner in all the three petitions, the petitioner firm is a regist...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmibai Vs. Ayodhya Prasad Alias Ramadhar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP47; II(1990)DMC594; 1991(0)MPLJ86
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. In this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the wife raises an important legal question as to whether she can be denied maintenance pendenate lite under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short 'the Act') only on the ground that her' marriage with her husband is the second marriage during the subsistance of the first marriage and the same is void under Section 11 read with Section 5(i) of the Act.2. A few facts may 'be stated before deciding the legal question arising for decision in the case. The wife/applicant filed proceedings in the matrimonial Court for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of theAct and during the pendency of those proceedings made an application for payment of maintenance pendente lite at the rate of Rs.400/- per month as also a lump sum amount of Rs. 400/- as litigation charges. In the course of enquiry on the question of liability of the husband to pay interim maintenance, the wife state...
Tag this Judgment!Pratibha Singh Vs. Dean, Lakshmi Bai National College of Physical Educ ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP8
T.N. Singh, J.1. The Sports Authority of India is vested with the management of Lakshmi Bai National College of Physical Education, Gwalior, for short, LNCPE, established by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India. It is 'autonomous' College, affiliated to Jiwaji University, Gwalior. The degree of Bachelor of Physical Education (B.P.E.) is conferred by the University for which a three-year course is conducted in LNCPE and regular examinations are held in April, while supplementary in August/ September every year.2. The petitioner took her examination Jn B.P.E. Part II in April, 1988, but failed in theory papers of two subjects, securing 22 marks in 'Psychology' and 16 marks in 'Citizenship', as against the prescribed minimum of 25 marks in each. Admittedly, results were declared on 12th June, 1989 and on 1st July, 1989, she applied for revaluation in those two papers, as per Annexure R/I. It appears that candidates who had to take supplementary/second examinati...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhpal Sing Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1990
Reported in: 1990(0)MPLJ336
ORDER1. Shri H.N. Upadhyaya, Cousel for the petitioner.2. Shri Arvind Dadawat, Additional Government Advocate, for the State.3. A return has come on behalf of respondent No. 4 and other respondents Nos. 1 and 2, are duly served. We have considered it proper, therefore, to dispose if finally this petition on merit. This view we have taken to avoid protraction of the proceedings as interim relief is prayed and there is substantial merit in the prayer.4. By order Annexure P/1, passed on 19-9-1988, petitioner came to be appointed as Chairman and six others as members of the Committee to manage the affairs of Mandi Samiti, Lahar, District Bhind. Shri Upadhyaya submitted that appointment was made by the Director of Mandis, acting under the Proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 56 of the M.P. Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1973, for short, the 'Adhiniyam'. We do not think if that position can be disputed. This view emerges from the admitted factual position that the Mandi Samiti had come into e...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhavati Sharma and ors. Vs. Brijmohan Parihar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1990
Reported in: 1990ACJ399
T.N. Singh, J.1. For the death of late Gopal Krishna Sharnia, husband of appellant No. 1 and father of appellant Nos. 2 to 4, the Claims Tribunal has awarded them Rs. 48,009.97 with costs Rs. 300/- and interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum against their claim of Rs. 3,36,970/-. Out of that amount, as per award, the insurer, respondent No. 3, is required to discharge its statutory liability to the extent of Rs. 50,000/-.2. In this appeal, enhancement is prayed by the claimants/appellants mainly on the ground that 'deductions' made are illegal and unwarranted. On the other hand, it is contended by respondent No. 1 (owner of the offending vehicle) that the entire sum under the award as also enhanced amount, if any, has to be paid by the insurer.3. The accident took place on 13.5.1977 at around 6.30 p.m. when the deceased was driving a scooter from Gwalior Railway Station towards Morar on public duty and was accompanied by a colleague, Chandrakant (CW 3), occupying the pillion seat....
Tag this Judgment!Trichinopoly Ramaswami Ardhanani and ors. Vs. Kripa Shankar Bhargava
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ597
ORDERB.M. Lal, J.1. This petition Under Section 482 read with Sections 397/401, Criminal Procedure Code is directed against an order dated 11-4-1987 by which the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhindwara in Criminal Case No. 1034/87 while taking cognizance of an offence Under Section 500, Indian Penal Code directed issuance of process against the petitioner in accordance with provisions of Section 204, Criminal Procedure Code.2. Brief facts leading to this petition are as under :Industrial Consultancy Bureau Pvt. Ltd., Kalyan, Bombay (in short ICB Pvt. Ltd.) is a Company registered under the Companies Act of which the petitioners Nos. 1 to 5 are directors, engineers and responsible officers.3. The Company is engaged in the business of engineering constructions. It entered into a contract with the complainant/respondent Kripa Shankar Bhargava to execute certain work on behalf of the I.C.B. Pvt. Ltd. near Nandan Site at Damua in district Chhindwara.4. It appears that some dispute of accounts...
Tag this Judgment!Trichinopoly Ramaswamy Ardhanani and ors. Vs. Kripa Shanker Bhargava
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2616
ORDERB.M. Lal, J.1. This petition under Section 482 read with Section 397/401, Criminal Procedure Code is directed against an order dated 11-4-1987 by which the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhindwara in Criminal Case No. 1034/87 while taking cognizance of an offence under Section 500, Indian Penal Code directed issuance of process against the petitioner in accordance with provisions of Section 204, Criminal Procedure Code.2. Brief facts leading to this petition are as under:Industrial Consultancy Bureau Pvt. Ltd., Kalyan, Bombay (in short ICB Pvt. Ltd.) is a Company registered under the Companies Act of which the petitioners Nos. 1 to 5 are directors, engineers and responsible officers.3. The Company is engaged in the business of engineering constructions. It entered into a contract with the complainant/ respondent Kripa Shanker Bhargava to execute certain work on behalf of the I.C.B. Pvt. Ltd. near Nandan Site at Damua in district Chhindwara.4. It appears that some dispute of accounts ...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Lal Vs. Chimman Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1990
Reported in: 1992ACJ535
K.K. Verma, J.1. Counsel for the parties are heard on the merits of the revision petition.2. The claimant's mother Bundabai preferred a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act on 25.2.1985, on the death of her husband, Ochha Ram, in a road accident. Bundabai died during the pendency of the claim proceedings. The co-claimant, the present petitioner, attained majority. He made an application for leave to amend the claim petition so as to show that his father Ochha Ram was not only a labourer but a cleaner of the vehicle. That application was rejected by the First Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior, on 5.7.1989.3. The learned Member rejected the application saying that there are no provisions in the Civil Procedure Code to enable the petitioner who has attained majority to change the nature of the averments in the pleadings set by his erstwhile next friend. The second ground is that the omission of the next friend to make the pleading goes against the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »