Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Tarabai W/O Kishnrao Vs. Govindram S/O Eknathrao Holkar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP97
S.D. Zha, J.1. This second appeal by the tenant against concurrent decree of eviction of two Courts below under Section 12(1)(a) r/w Section 13(6) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter called, 'the Act') was admitted for final hearing by order dated 8-7-85 on the following substantial question of law :--Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the same, the Court below has erred in holding that the plaintiff has made out a case for eviction on the grounds specified in Section 12(1)(a) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, in view of the fact that the notice demanding arrears of rent was not in respect of the entire leased premises?2. The plaintiff filed suit against defendant/appellant claiming eviction from the suit accommodation from the suit accommodation on grounds set out under Section 12(1)(a) of the Act arrears of rent and Clause (c) nuisance. The defendant in her written statement stated that the tenanted premises consisted not only ...
Raghunathsingh Vs. Nanalal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP126
S.D. Zha, J.1. This second appeal by defendant was by order dated 27-1-89 admitted for final hearing on the following substantial question of law arising in the appeal.(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the suit of the plaintiff was barred by time? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case thumb impression put on the Vahi Khata can extend the period of limitation or whether amounts to valid acknowledgment under law? 2. The plaintiff filed suit against defendant on the allegation that on 1 -8-72 under an arrangement by which the defendant was to supply milk, the plaintiff advanced Rupees 9,400/- in cash and obtained his thumb impression on Vahi-Khata, copy of which is Ex. P/l. The defendant on 12-8-73, 1-11-74, 10-8-76, 5-8-79 and 10-8-80 towards advance respectively deposited Rs. 185/-, 1101//-, 200/-, 200/- and 100/- totalling Rs. 1786/-.The balance of principal amount thus worked out to Rs. 17,6141-, interest at the rate of 1% per mensem to Rs. 9,666...
Chanchal Sharma Vs. Ganga Ram Sharma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1990
Reported in: I(1991)DMC193
P.C. Pathak, J.1. The defendant wife has filed this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called the 'Act') against a decree of divorce under Section 13(1-A)(i) of the Act.2. On 23-11-1979, the respondent filed petition for divorce on the allegations that their marriage was solemnised on 5-2-1976 at Khamgaon, District Buldhana, State of Maharashtra whereafter she came to reside with him at Raipur. She stayed with him hardly for 3-4 days. During the stay, she did not permit him to consummate the marriage. She confessed that she was infatuated to some boy-friend, and led the life of unchastity with him. After she was taken away by her parents, he learnt that she carried on adulterous relations with several boy friends and lastly that she had withdrawn herself from his society for reasons best known to her. He therefore prayed for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce on grounds under Section 13(1A)(i) & (ii) of the Act. On 14-10-1981, the respondent ...
P. Padmavati Amma Vs. K.G. Gopinath Nayar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1990
Reported in: I(1991)DMC463
B.M. Lal, J.1. This revision is directed against an order dated 27-7-1988 passed by Shri P.K. Dubey, IV Additional Sessions Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bhopal in R.C.S. No. 9-A/88 whereby exercising the jurisdiction under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, the Matrimonial Court granted maintenance pendente lite to the tune of Rs. 150/- per month and Rs. 300/- as litigation expenses in favour of the applicant and against the non-applicant/husband. Not satisfied with the above grant of maintenance, the applicant/wife has filed this revision on the ground inter-alia that considering the family status of the parties, this amount is too meagre to meet both ends.2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant contended that the husband/non-applicant is admittedly earning about Rs. 800/- per month and he can easily give half of the amount i.e. Rs. 400/- per month. No doubt, if there are no dependants of the husband, the wife being Ardhangani is certainly entitled to receive ...
Usha Jhingran and ors. Vs. Budhsen and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1990
Reported in: 1992ACJ110
B.C. Varma, J.1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act is by the unsuccessful claimants who laid a claim for compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for the death of P.N. Jhingran, husband of the first appellant and father of the remaining. On a finding that the appellants could not prove the cause of death of P.N. Jhingran, the Claims Tribunal has dismissed the entire claim. It has, however, been found that if the appellants were to succeed, the compensation payable would be Rs. 1,22,400/- with interest at 6 per cent thereon from the date of the application. The liability of the insurer, in terms of the insurance policy, has been determined at Rs. 50.000/-. The Tribunal also noted that only general damages were claimed. No special damages were claimed.2. The facts are that on 3.8.1977, P.N. Jhingran, an employee of the Sun Carriage Factory, Jabalpur, met with an accident while he was proceeding to the factory. The truck, owned by respondent No. 2 an...
Jayant Vitamins Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1990
Reported in: 1992(38)ECC199; 1991(53)ELT278(MP)
ORDERA.G. Qureshi, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 is a public limited company having their registered office at Ratlam. The company is engaged in manufacture of drugs and Pharmaceuticals including Vitamin C and Sorbitol. The petitioner No. 2 is a shareholder of the petitioner No. 1. The company is situated in the backward area so declared by the Government of M.P. in the Industrial Area of Ratlam. The petitioners are aggrieved by the show cause notice dated 24th February, 1988 demanding from the petitioners duty of excise on the removal of one of the products of the petitioners viz. 'Sorbitol'. According to the petitioners, the demand made in the impugned notice is illegal, without authority of law, barred by limitation and without jurisdiction: The petitioners contend that Sorbitol 70 per cent and Sorbitol powder BP is produced by the petitioners which conform to the pharmacopoeial standards. They are bulk drugs and classifiable under residuary Item No. 29.24 of Chapter 29 of the Schedule ...
Roop Chand JaIn Vs. Dr. (Mrs.) V.N. Naik and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-11-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC320
P.C. Pathak, J.1. One of the defendants had filed this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The respondent No. 1 filed a suit for damages against the appellant and respondents 2 to 5 on the allegation that while constructing the fifth storey over the house of which she occupies the ground floor, a labourer as also a part of the wall fell on her car, which was parked in front of her house. As a result of that, the car was damaged substantially. She claimed damages amounting to Rs. 15, 000/-.3. The defendants denied the claim in toto. They submitted that the house in question belongs to Subhash Chand, the separated son of the appellant. They also denied that the construction was in any manner supervised by the appellant. They also submitted that the car was injured and the insurance company had already compensated the loss.4. Learned trial Court, on a finding that the appellant was an occupier of the building in question and was in charge of the construction work, pa...
Management, Dainik Naveen Duniya Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-1990
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ510MP; 1991(0)MPLJ114
ORDERB.C. Varma, J.1. Respondent Parasnath is an employee of the petitioner and before his order of transfer to Bhopal, vide order dated 11.2.1987, was employed in petitioner's office at Jabalpur. According to the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 was relieved from the office at Jabalpur the next day, i.e., 12.2.1987, and the Labour Commissioner was informed accordingly. It appears that somewhere in the month of April, 1985, a reference was made to the Labour Court relating to fixation of respondent No. 2's wages. That reference is still pending and the petitioner's contention is that it did not receive any notice of that reference to the Labour Court. However, on 11.3.1987, the respondent No. 2 voluntarily appeared before the Labour Court and submitted his statement of claim. On 12.3.1987, the respondent No. 2 (the employee) made an application under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 complaining that by the order of transfer his condition of service has been changed and ...
Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs. Kishanlal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ702
T.N. Singh, J.1. For last ten years, this hopeless appeal has awaited a short order and that is made here and now.2. The claimant/appellant described himself as an artist and at that, a film artist. He came from Bombay to Gwalior and on the fateful night, on 25.5.1977, at around 11.00 p.m., the car which he was driving met with an accident near Tekanpur.3. His case is that from the opposite side, a truck, fully loaded, coming at a very high speed, at around 50/60 km. per hour, suddenly dashed against his car which got damaged and he also sustained some injuries. In the car, he was accompanied by two witnesses, CWs 2 and 3, but the owner of the car did not enter the witness-box. Admittedly, the position on facts is that the claimant had borrowed the car which he was driving himself when the accident took place. Nothing has come on record to suggest that any claim has been lodged for damage caused to the car. It has not been proved by any reliable and independent evidence that the car su...
Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs. Kishan Lal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-1990
Reported in: 1(1992)ACC446
T.N. Singh, J.1. For last ten years, this hopeless appeal has awaited a short order and that is made here and now.2. The claimants/appellant described himself as an artist and at that, a film artist. He came from Bombay to Gwalior and on the fateful night, on 25.5.1977, at around 11.00 p.m., the car which he was driving met with an accident near Tekanpur.3. His case is that from the opposite side, a truck, fully loaded, coming at a very high speed, at around 50/60 km. per hour, suddenly dashed against his car which got damaged and he also sustained some injuries. In the car, he was accompanied by two witnesses, CWs 2 and 3, but the owner of the car did not enter the witness-box. Admittedly, the position on facts is that the claimants had borrowed the car, which he was driving himself when the accident took place. Nothing has come on record to suggest that any Claim has been lodged for damage caused to the car. It has not been proved by any reliable and independent evidence that the car...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »