Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
Dr. Kanhaiyalal Vs. Mohitkumar Vyas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP54; 1990MPLJ764
Y.B. Suryavanshi, J.1. The petitioner Dr. Sharda, a medical practitioner, who has appeared as a witness in the Court of Shri Mohit Kumar Vyas, IInd Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Indore, in proceedings under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C., in Misc. Civil Case No. 6/88, has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for expunging derogatory remarks passed in the order dated 7-2-1989.2. At the outset, we want to make it clear that we are not concerned at all, with the merits or demerits of the orders aforesaid and the controversy is cribbed and confined to the limited question-- 'Whether the learned Court was justified in making the impugned remarks; and if the answer is in the negative, to what extent the objectionable portions be expunged?' Any incidental observations by us, if any, be not construed as any expression of an opinion on the proceedings in Misc. Civil Case No. 6 of 1988.3. The backdrop: Broadly stated, the non-applicants in Misc. Ci...
Dhaniram S/O Babulal and anr. Vs. Girza Devi W/O Omprakash and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-06-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ300
ORDERR.C. Lahoti , J.1. The defendants in a Small Cause suit have come up in revision aggrieved by an order of the trial Court rejecting their application Under Order 7, Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code.2. The plaintiff/non-petitioners have filed a simple suit for recovery of rent in arrrears for a period of eighteen and half months between 13-1-1986 and 27-7-1987 alleging that the defendants were the tenant of one Leelabai who had alienated the suit property to the plaintiffs under a registe Red deed of sale dated 13-1-1986. One of the pleas raised in the written statement filed by the defendant/petitioners was that Lilabai had entered into a contract for sale of the suit property in favour of one Babula) on 12-9-1985 and had also delivered possession of the property to said Babulal in part performance of the contract. The defendants further pleaded that since 12-9-1985 they were holding the premises as tenants of Babulal, who had also filed a suit for specific performance of the contrac...
Smt. Sarmaniya Bai and ors. Vs. Madhya Pradesh Rajya Parivahan Nigam a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC193; 1990ACJ862; AIR1990MP306; 1990MPLJ387
T.N. Singh, J.1. Three matters are linked up with the Division Bench, making the reference, taking the view that a common question of law arises in all the three matters and the question being of general importance, deserves decision of a Larger Bench. Claimants/appellants have prayed for enhancement of compensation awarded under Section 110B of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, for short, the Act, in this appeal. During pendency of the claim petition an order waspassed by a learned single Judge of this Court in Civil Revision No. 134 of 1987 on 31-8-1989. By that order claimants' prayer for enforcement of the interim award, passed in the pending claim petition, under Section 92A of the Act, was rejected. Shortly and precisely, challenge to the correctness of the view expressed therein is the basis of the reference made to this Bench.2. Learned District Judge, Shivpuri, acting as Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, for short, the Tribunal, had passed the order dated 18-8-1986 (which was impug...
R.N. Rai Vs. Shesh Narayan Rai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1990MPLJ528
ORDERS.K. Jha, C.J.1. The defendant of Civil Suit No-17-A/88 of the Court of 4th Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur, is the petitioner here against the orders dated 16-1-1990 and 17-10-1989. By the impugned orders, the Court below has held that the matter with regard to remission of court fees or treating the plaintiff non-applicant as an indigent person, is a matter to be tried as an issue in the suit itself and, has, therefore, shelved the question for determination at a later date.2. The Court below has misdirected itself on a question of law and thereby refused to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by law. If it is a matter to be gone under the provisions of order XXXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure for a decision on the question as to whether the non-applicant is an indigent person or not an enquiry is a must before the suit can proceed further, it can, therefore, by no stretch of imagination, be held to be an integral part of an issue in the suit itself, ...
Nazirkhan S/O Sadekhan Pathan Vs. M.P. Rajya Bhandar Grah Nigam Madhya ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1990MPLJ828
Y. B. Suryavanshi, J.1. The petitioner Nazir Khan Pathan, Ex. Godown Keeper of M. P. Rajya Bhandar Grah Nigam (for short the 'Nigam'), branch at Khachrod, Ujjain in this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is challenging the orders dated 28-4-1988 (Annexure XII) passed by the Managing, Director of the 'Nigam' dismissing the petitioner's services as also the orders dated 26-5-1988 (Anexxure XIV) by appellate Authority/Chairman of the said 'Nigam' dismissing the appeal in three words which are: ^^fopkjksijkar fujLr** on the grounds that both the orders are illegal and without jurisdiction and also totally contrary to the principles of natural justice.2. According to the petitioner, Respondent No. 1 'Nigam' is a statutory body constituted under the provisions of M. P. Agricultural Warehouse Act, 1947 and is financed and totally controlled by the State of M. P. and is 'State' or 'instrumentality of State' under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Undisputedly ...
Parenteral Drugs (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ386
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners-Company engaged in manufacture and supply of intravenous fluids to various hospitals, including hospitals attached to Medical Colleges, challenges the governmental order dated 17-7-1989 [filed by the petitioner as Annexure-R/3(4)], thereby directing purchases of intravenous fluids for hospitals atttached to Medical Colleges from respondent No. 4-M/s. Hindusthan Antibiotic Ltd., Pimpri, alone, and the State action in issuing such orders to M/s. Hindusthan Antibiotic Ltd., as wholly arbitrary, discriminatory, grossly violative of the right of equality, guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.2. Before proceeding any further, it would be desirable to deal with an objection in the nature of a preliminary objection as raised by the respondent No. 4 as regards maintainability of the petition itself for alleged violation of executive instructions, issued by the State Government...
T. Parathasarathy and ors. Vs. Smt. Madhu Sangal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1992CriLJ26
Acts/Rules/Orders: Cantonments Act, 1924 - Sections 179, 181, 181(4), 181(5), 181(6), 185, 187, 254, 256, 259 and 272; General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section 3(22); Civil Procedure Code (CPC) - Order 39, Rule 2A; Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1974 - Sections 190, 200 to 205, 209 and 482; Indian Penal Code - Sections 52, 149, 294, 341, 352, 392, 427, 448, 451 and 452Cases Referred: Smt. Nagawwa v. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi AIR 1976 SC 1947 : 1976 Cri LJ 1533; Kewal Krishan v. Suraj Bhan, AIR 1980 SC 1780 : 1980 Cri LJ 1271; Nirmaljit v. State of W.B. AIR 1972 SC 2639; Chandra Deo v. Prokash Chandra Bose AIR 1963 SC 1430 : 1963 (2) Cri LJ 397; R.G. Ruia v. State of Bombay 1958 SCR 618 : AIR 1958 SC 97 : 1958 Cri LJ 244; Vadilal Panchal v. Ghadigaoskar AIR 1960 SC 1113 : 1960 Cri LJ 1499; Chandra Deo Singh v. Prokash Chandra Bose (1964) 1 SCR 639 : AIR 1963 SC 1430 : 1963 (2) Cri LJ 397; H. Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1966 SC 97 : 1964 Cri LJ 82Disposition: Application dismissedOrde...
Badri Prasad and anr. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1992ACJ98
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, preferred by the claimants praying for enhancement in the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. The facts not in dispute at the stage of this appeal are that late Kishan, the son of the claimant appellants, expired on 22.11.1984 in an accident caused by motor vehicle truck No. MBW 7473 driven by the respondent No. 1 owned by the respondent No. 2 and insured with the respondent No. 3 at the material time. The cause of the accident has been found by the Tribunal to be the negligent driving of respondent No. 1 and rightly so because in the face of the direct testimony of the eye-witnesses who had seen the accident occurring, the driver respondent No. 1 did not even choose to appear in the witness-box.3. The Tribunal upon an appreciation of evidence has held that the deceased was a labourer earning around Rs. 10/- a day, i.e., Rs. 300/- per month out of which he used to spend fifty per cent of t...
Smt. Usha Devi and ors. Vs. Bhu-arjan Adhikari, Indore and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-1990
Reported in: AIR1990MP375
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. The petitioners are the trustees of the Devi Ahilyabai Holkar Educational Trust, Manik Bag, Indore (hereinafter called the Trust). According to the petitioners the Lal Bag Palace (hereinafter called the Palace) is one of the properties vested in the Trust. It comprises of an imposing palatial building, ancillary buildings, wells, trees and the land admeasuring 28.188 hectares on which it stands. It is within the municipal limits of Indore. Initially the palace belonged to the late Highness Maharaja Yeshwantrao Holkar, who was the Ruler of Indore. The Maharaja created a private trust in the name of his daughter Princess Usha Raje by a trust deed, known as Princess Usha Trust. However, at a later date Maha-rani Usha Devi and her children extinguished their entire interest in the vast properties of the Princess Usha Trust including the palace in question and transferred them to the petitioners Trust. As such according to the petitioners they are the legal owners of the ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Princess Usha Trust
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR428(MP)
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. The Revenue has filed this application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for calling for a statement of the case from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the Wealth-tax Officer assessed the non-applicant trust on the net wealth of Rs. 2,49,59,146 for the assessment year 1982-83. The assessee is a private trust created on April 10, 1950. The assessee filed returns declaring its net wealth on the ground that in the year 1973, the beneficiaries under the trust had transferred their beneficial interest in favour of another trust. However, the Wealth-tax Officer assessed the trust as above for the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), following the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Princess Usha Trust v. CIT : [1983]144ITR808(MP) which decision was given in respect of the assessee's case, held that, on the valuation date, the said Princess Usha Trust ceas...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »