Madhya Pradesh Court November 1990 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.
Smt. Kamla Bai and anr. Vs. Arjan Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP275
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 1-9-1984, passed in Civil Appeal No. 56A of 1982, of the Court of Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Sehore (arising out of Civil Suit No. 29A of 1977, decided on 31-1-1978 by the Court of Civil Judge (Class II), Sehore). whereby, while confirming the decree of the trial Court, the plaintiffs' suit for possession of 5.80 acres of land, situated in village Umarkhal, Tahsil Ichawar, District Sehore, has been decreed.2. Brief history of the case is that the plaintiff filed a suit on 25-6-1975, with the assertion that Babal the predecessor-in-interest of defendant No. 2 Jhita, transferred the suit property to defendant No. 4, vide registered sale-deed dated 15-12-1966', and delivered possession to him. The defendant No. 4 transferred the suit land, vide registered sale-deed dated 10-6-1975, to plaintiffs and delivered possession of the land. However, the defendants 1, 2 and 3 dispossessed him on 2...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Prempal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2878
S.K. Chawla, J.1. The State has filed this appeal against acquittal of the respondent of the offence Under Section 409, I.P.C.2. Respondent Prempal Uike was Extra Departmental Branch Post-Master at Gillore Branch Post-Office. One Gokulprasad (PW-2) had a savings account in that post office. An amount of Rs. 675/ - was in balance in that savings account as on 19-4-1980. The respondent had duly accounted for that amount in the accounts of his post-office. Thereafter, Gokulprasad had on 21-4-80, 5-5-1980, 9-5-1980, 26-5-1980, 3-6-80 and 14-6-1980 deposited sums of Rs. 225/-, 300/-, 300/-, 68/-400/ - and 1035/ - respectively. In other words, Gokulprasad had between 21-4-1980 to 14-6-1980 deposited from time to time a total sum of Rs. 2328/-. The prosecution case was that the respondent Prempal Uike during that period had not accounted for the said gross sum of Rs. 2328/- and hence he had committed the offence of criminal breach of trust punishable Under Section 409, I.P.C.3. The learned Ju...
Shri Shantilal Chhitarji Soni and ors. Vs. M.P. Rajya Parivahan Nigam ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC122
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. The appellants have filed this appeal aggrieved by the award dated 30.3.1981 passed by the second Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in claim case No. 108 of 1979.2. The respondent No. 1 M.P. Rajya Parivahan Nigam (hereinafter referred to as 'the Nigma' has filed a claim petition before the lower tribunal under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act alleging that on 21.12.78 near the culvert of Koram river on the Bombay-Agra road an accident took place because of the rash and negligent act of driver respondent No. 2 Rafiq Khan while driving truck registration Number MPI.3457, who while driving the truck rashly and negligently dashed against the vehicle of the Nigam bearing No. MPI-6347 driven by its driver Rashid casually and with a normal speed. Due to the dash by the aforesaid truck the bumper, the door on the driver's side of the bus and the dash board were damaged and the front portion of the body was also bent. For getting the aforesaid damages ...
Shantilal Chhitarji Soni and ors. Vs. M.P. Rajya Parivahan Nigam and a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-1990
Reported in: 1992ACJ780
A.G. Qureshi, J. 1. The appellants have filed this appeal aggrieved by the award dated 30.3.1981 passed by the Second Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, in Claim Case No. 108 of 1979.2. The respondent No. 1, M.P. Rajya Parivahan Nigam (hereinafter referred to as 'the Nigam') had filed a claim petition before the Claims Tribunal under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act alleging that on 21.12.1978 near the culvert of Koram river on the Bombay-Agra Road an accident took place because of the rash and negligent act of driver respondent No. 2, Rafiq Khan, while driving truck bearing registration No. MPI 3457, who while driving the truck rashly and negligently dashed against the vehicle of the Nigam bearing No. MPI 6347 driven by its driver Rashid casually and with a normal speed. Due to the dash by the aforesaid truck the bumber, the door on the driver's side of the bus and the dashboard were damaged and the front portion of the body was also bent. For getting the afore...
Dr. Ajay Bullagon Vs. Dean, G.R. Medical College and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-1990
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ152
ORDER1. Three other petitions, M. P. No. 2471/1990 (Dr. Suresh Chandra Gupta v. Dean, G. R. Medical College. Gwalior and Ors.); M. P. No. 2474/1990 (Dr. Sanjay Saxena v. State of M. P and Ors.) and M. P. No. 2544/1990 (Dr. Atul Jain v. State of M. P. and Ors. were heard together with this petition, mostly common questions of law and facts arising in all the four petitions.2. The facts in so far as relevant for disposal of these petitions are not in dispute.3. Dr. Ajay Bullagon, Dr. Suresh Chandra Gupta and Dr. Atul Jain are aspirants of a seat each in post Graduation Course of study i.e. M.D. at G. R. Medical College, Gwalior. Dr. Sanjay Saxena is an aspirant for a seat in M. S. Course of study. This is the only point of distinction amongst the several petitioners.4. All the petitioners are Medical Graduates of G. R. Medical College, Gwalior. In the waiting list of M.D., Dr. Suresh Chandra Gupta, Dr. Ajay Bullagon and Dr. Atul Jain are placed respectively at Serial Nos. 1, 2, and 5. Dr...
Ragni Saxena W/O Mukund Vs. Mukund S/O Krishna Pyare
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-20-1990
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ650
T.N. Singh, J.1. This appeal arises out of a matrimonial lis and is by the plaintiff-wife. She has challenged the order passed on 17-11-1988 decreeing her suit on the ground that Court below had no jurisdiction to proceed with the trial of the suit after she had filed an application in person in court on 23-9-1988 praying that she be allowed to withdraw the suit and the suit be dismissed on withdrawal.2. From the order-sheet what I find is that on 23-9-1988 the Presiding Officer of the Court was on leave and as such date was given to the plaintiff for her appearance. As per order dated 5-10-1988, it is found, she again appeared in person with her counsel Shri A. K. Shrivastava, in Court. But, on that date even she was not heard; and her case was not taken up. On the next date, namely, 7-10-1988 her counsel, Shri Shrivastava, appeared. Date for arguments was fixed and the matter was directed to be listed on 12 -10 -1988. It appears from the order sheet that on subsequent dates, namely, ...
Chitoolal Ramswaroop Rathore Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-1990
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ793
K.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30th January, 1986, passed by II A.S J., Mandleshwar in S.T. No. 174 of 1984 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo R.I. for 4 months:2. It is not in dispute that the appellant Chhitoolal, at the relevant time, was bus-driver in the employment of Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. The victim Kishan Rao (P.W.2) and his brother Madhusudan Rao @ Madhu Rao (P.W.6) and Vithal Rao (P.W.3) were in the employment of G. P.'Bhatia and Co. engaged in transport business. In the evening of 6-10-1984 at Maheshwar bus stand there was some dispute between the appellant and Kishan Rao (P.W.2) over passengers. Madhu Rao was also involved in the dispute and so was Mishrilal, the brother of the appellant.3. According to the prosecution, after the incident at the bus-st...
Heeralal Gattulal JaIn Vs. Smt. Ravi W/O Heeralal Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ938
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. In this revision, the petitioner, who instituted a suit for dissolution of his marriage Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act) against the respondent, has challenged the order of interim maintenance awarded at the rate of Rs. 130/- per month to the minor son.2. Ku. Nutan Saxena contended that Under Section 24 of the Act, no maintenance can be granted to a child as it is the wife or the husband, as the case may be, who has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceedings, may claim monthly maintenance during the proceedings, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent and can also claim expenses of the proceedings. Learned counsel pressed into service on Rukmanidevi's case, 1970 JLJ Note 118, Akasam Chinna Babu's case, AIR 1967 Orissa 163, Kartarchand Dalliram Jain's case, AIR 1982 Bom. 14 and Puran Chand's case, AIR 1981 J.K. 5. It was also submitt...
Smt. Chandrani Bai Vs. Pradeep Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP286
R.D. Shukla, J. 1. This is plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 30-3-1984, passed by the District Judge, Seoni, in Civil Appeal No. 47-A of 1983 (arising out of the judgment and decree dated 3-10-1983, passed by the Civil Judge (Class-1), Seoni, in Civil Suit No. 3-A of 1981), whereby the plaintiffs suit for possession of a room of the house situated in Lakhnadon (District Seoni), has been dismissed.2. Brief history of the case is that the plaintiff Smt. Chandranibai is the widow of one Hukumchand Jain, resident of Bazar Mohalla of Lakhnadon (District Seoni). He died on 2-7-1979. Hukumchand owned and possessed huge moveable and immovable property. It was inherited by the plaintiff.3. The plaintiff's case is that the defendant Pradeep Kumar is known to her and he had been helping her. He made a request to give him the suit 'kotha' for opening a shop. The plaintiff permitted him to possess the 'kotha' of her house situated in Lakhnadon (District Seoni) and as shown in...
Lila Sahu Vs. Kailash Narayan Sahu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1990
Reported in: I(1991)DMC273
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is a petition by the wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of Matrimonial Proceedings pending at Bhopal to Jabalpur. The husband has instituted proceedings for divorce against the wife at Bhopal, on the basis of jurisdiction derived by that Court as the parties had last jointly resided together at Bhopal, in accordance with Section 19(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.2. Learned counsel appearing for the wife sought transfer of the proceedings from Bhopal to Jabalpur, firstly on the ground that wife is employed in the Co-operative Bank at Jabalpur, she had two sons who are taking education at Jabalpur and it would be inconvenient and expensive for her to attend the court proceedings at Bhopal. According to me this cannot be said to be a good ground, particularly when it is admitted that the sons are grown up, aged thirteen and fourteen and are not of the age in which they are required to accompany the mother always. So far as...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »