Madhya Pradesh Court October 1990 Judgments
Ramcharan Mansha and anr. Vs. Badri Prasad Kushwaha and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ721
ORDERR.C. Lahoti, J.1. The plaintiff/appellants are aggrieved by the order of the trial Court rejecting their prayer for the grant of an ad interim injunction.2. The facts in so far as relevant for the disposal of this appeal may briefly be stated. There is a registered deed of sale dated 22-12-1973 in respect of the suit land, executed in favour of defendant No. 1. The plaintiffs claim that the sale-deed was a nominal one and a prohibited transaction of loan within the meaning of Section 2(f) of Madhya Pradesh Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi-Bhumi Dharakon Ka Udhar Dene Walon Ke Bhumi Hadapane Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the 'ACT'). Relying on the deed of sale, the defendant No. 1 filed a suit for permanent preventive injunction seeking to protect his possession over the land which was registered as C.O.S. No. 301-A/83 in the Court of Vth Civil Judge Class I. Gwalior, wherein a prayer for grant of an ad interim injunction wa...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Digambar JaIn Siddhant Mahavidyalaya Vs. Kasturba Shiksha Prasar ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-1990
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ661
ORDER1. Heard counsel. The matter is hotly contested.2. Indeed, in pre-lunch session, Shri M. C. Jain, counsel prayed that connected matter, namely, M.P. No. 2622 of 1990, be also listed for hearing and disposal analogously. On referring to order passed in this matter on 26-10-1990, we found his prayer reasonable and accordingly directed records of that matter also to be brought from Registry and that is before us.3. This order shall govern disposal accordingly of M.P. Nos. 2571 and 2622, both of 1990. At this stage, we may make it clear that the intervener is a body of persons who claim to be member of Jain community. They submit that respondent No. 6, Shri Gopal Digambar Jain Siddhant Mahavidyalaya, Morena, namely, the petitioner in M.P. No. 2571 of 1980, is managing an institution of Jain Community and they were, therefore, necessary party to be heard in the matter. We found their prayer reasonable and accordingly, their intervention is allowed.4. During the course of the arguments,...
Tag this Judgment!Amarsingh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1077
1. Three persons were booked for committing murder of Ram Roop, of whom two were acquitted. Appellant being one of them and having suffered conviction Under Section 302 IPC has challenged that and also sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life imposed on him.2. On two short grounds, appellant's counsel Shri B. N. Kulshrestha, has assailled the verdict. His first contention is that the trial Court applied double standard in appreciating evidence and erred in law in convicting the appellant while acquitting on the same evidence the other two co-accused. Secondly, he submits, at most conviction of the appellant on the evidence may be justifiable Under Section 304 Part II, IPC. Learned Additional Sessions Judge erred in law in ignoring the fact that the case of the appellant was covered by Exceptions (2) and (4) of Section 300 IPC.3. Be it stated at the outset that the appellant specifically pleaded right of private defence and, in our view, that plea has been rejected on erroneous consid...
Tag this Judgment!Radheshyam S/O Bhuvanishankar Trivedi and anr. Vs. Nasir HussaIn S/O M ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ365
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This appeal has been filed aggrieved by the Award dated 22nd July, 1988 passed by the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur in Claims Case No. 21 of 1986, whereby the application of the appellants filed Under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal.2. The facts leading to this petition, in short, are that one Abhay Kumar, aged about 10 years, met with an accident on 7-1-1986 at about 12.15 p.m. on Laduna Road at Sitamau. The said Abhay Kumar was the only son of the claimants. According to the applicants-appellants on 7-1-1986 at about 12.15 p.m. when Abhay Kumar, was going with his school-mates from his school to Argada playfield for attending some function, bus No. MPF 7789 belonging to respondent No. 1 and being driven by the respondent No. 2 at a high speed rashly and negligently, dashed against Abhay Kumar and crushed him under the rear and front wheels as a result of which Abhay Kumar received injuries and s...
Tag this Judgment!Radheshyam and anr. Vs. Nasir HussaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ755
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the award dated 22nd July, 1988 passed by the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur in Claim Case No. 21 of 1986, whereby the application of the appellants filed under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal.2. The facts leading to this petition, in short, are that one Abhay Kumar, aged about 10 years, met with an accident on 7.1.1986 at about 12.15 p.m. on Laduna Road at Sitamau. The said Abhay Kumar was the only son of the claimants. According to the applicants-appellants on 7.1.1986 at about 12.15 p.m. when Abhay Kumar was going with his schoolmates from his school to Argada playfield for attending some function, bus No. MPF 7789, belonging to respondent No. 1 and being driven by the respondent No. 2 at a high speed rashly and negligently, dashed against Abhay Kumar and crushed him under the rear and front wheels as a result of which Abhay Kumar received injuries a...
Tag this Judgment!Radheyshyam and anr. Vs. Nasir HussaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC479
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This appeal has been filed aggrieved by the Award dated 22nd July, 1988 passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur in claims case No. 21 of 86 where-by the application of the appellants filed under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal.2. The facts leading to this petition, in short are that one Abhay Kumar, aged about 10 years, met with an accident on 7.1.1986atabout 12.15p.m. on Laduna Road at Sitamau. The said Abhay Kumar was the only son of the claimants. According to the applicants appellants on 7.1.1986 at about 12.15 p.m. when Abhay Kumar, was going with his school-mates from his school to Argada play field for attending some function, bus No. MPF 7789 belonging to respondent No. 1 and being driven by the respondent No. 2 at a high speed rashly and negligently, dashed against Abhay Kumar and crushed him under the rear and front wheels as a result of which Abhay Kumar received injuries and succumb...
Tag this Judgment!Shankarbhai S/O Khushalbhai and ors. Vs. Abdul Aziz S/O Akil Mohd. and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-26-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ736
ORDERA.G. Qureshi, J.1. This order shall govern the decision of M. A. No. 264 of 1990 (Shankar Bhai and 6 others v. Abdul Ajiz and Anr.) and M. A. No. 265 of 1990 (Shantilal and two others v. Abdul Ajiz and Anr.) filed by the appellants aggrieved by the order of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore dated 21-124989 in claim case No. 21 of 1988 and 28 of 1988. In both the cases the claimants have filed their claim petition before the lower Tribunal for claiming compensation against the respondents on the basis of an accident occurred on 25-11-1987, alleging that the truck belonging to respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3, dashed against the matador in which the claimants were travelling. The claim petitions are still pending for decision.2. During the pendency of the petitions the appellants filed applications Under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for interim award. The learned lower Tribunal was, however, of the view that the allegations of the claim...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Bhai and ors. Vs. Abdul Aziz and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-26-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ704
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This order shall govern the decision of M.A. No. 264 of 1990, Shankar Bhat v. Abdul Ajiz and MA No. 265 of 1990, Shantilal v. Abdul Ajiz, filed by the appellants aggrieved by the order of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, dated 21.12.1989 in claim case Nos. 21 of 1988 and 28 of 1988. In both the cases the claimants have filed their claim petitions before the lower Tribunal for claiming compensation against the respondents on the basis of an accident which occurred on 25.11.1987, alleging that the truck belonging to respondent No. 1 and insured by respondent No. 2 dashed against the Matador in which the claimants were travelling. The claim petitions are still pending for decision.2. During the pendency of the petitions the appellants filed applications under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for interim award. The learned lower Tribunal was, however, of the view that the allegations of the claimants have been denied by the respondents and th...
Tag this Judgment!Shankarbhai and ors. Vs. Abdul Ajij and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-26-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC556
ORDERA.G. Qureshi, J.1. This order shall govern the decision of M.A. No. 264 of 90 (Shankar Bhai and 6 Ors. v. Abdul Ajiz and Anr.) and M.A. No 265 of 1990 (Shantilal and two Ors. v. Abdul Ajiz and Ors.) filed by the appellants aggrieved by the order of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore dated. 21.12.1989 in claim case No. 21 of 1988 and 28 of 1988. In both the cases the claimants have filed their claim petition before the lower Tribunal for claiming compensation against the respondents on the basis of an accident occurred on 25.11.1987 alleging that the truck belonging to respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3.dashed against the matador in which the claimants were travelling. The claim petitions are still pending for decision.2. During the pendency of the petitions the appellants filed applications under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for imterim award. The learned lower Tribunal, was, however, of the view that the allegations of the claimants hav...
Tag this Judgment!Johri and ors. Vs. Mahila Draupti Alias Dropadi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP340; 1991(0)MPLJ217
S.K. Dubey, J.1. The legal representatives of the purchaser/defendant No. 1 in the suit, aggrieved of the judgment and decree passed in Civil Appeal No. 10-A/1976, on 9-3-1978, by District Judge, Morena, whereby the suit of the plaintiff, a lunatic, has been decree reversing the judgment and decree of dismissal of the suit, passed by Civil Judge, Class II, Sabalgarh, in Civil Suit No. 14-A/1970, decided on 31-1-1976.2. This second appeal was admitted by this Court on 22-2-1980 for final hearing on the following substantial question of law:--'Whether by applying the principle of 'feeding the estoppel' as contemplated by Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, the plaintiff will be entitled to a decree for joint possession in as much as the defendant/ purchaser could claim at least the ownership of the undivided interest of Dropadi?'At the time of final hearing an application was filed by the appellants on 4-10-1990 under Section 100(5), Civil Procedure Code, for grant of leave to ur...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »