Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Jaikumar Rajkumar and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ732
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, filed by the railway administration, represented through the appellant Union of India, challenges the judgment and decree dated 18.10.1985, whereby the claim of the respondent has been accepted to the extent of Rs. 12,250/-, towards loss occasioned to the respondent for delayed delivery of his goods consigned to the Railways for transport.2. Admittedly, the plaintiff respondent had booked 120 quintals of batri pulses from Jabalpur to Shalimar on 19.11.1978. The goods were carried to Shalimar and were delivered to M/s. Shewlal Durga Prasad who was the endorsed consignee and commission agent for dealing in the goods on behalf of the respondent. According to the plaintiff, the normal period of transit of goods was ten days and the goods were delivered as late as on 14.1.1979 at Shalimar. By that time market price of the goods had considerably fallen down and the plaintiff was required to sell the goods a...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Jaikumar Raj Kumar and Company
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC703
D.D. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, filed by the Railway administration, represented through the appellant Union of India, challenges the judgment and decree dated. 18.10.1985 .whereby the claim of the respondent, has been accepted to the extent of Rs. 12,250/- towards loss occasioned to the respondent for delayed delivery of his goods consigned to the railway for transport.2. Admittedly, the plaintiff respondent had booked 120 qunitals of batri pulses from . Jabalpur to Shalimar on 19.11.1978. The goods were carried to Shalimar and were delivered to M/s. Shewlal Durga Prasad who was the endorsed consignee and commission agent for dealing in the goods on behalf of the respondent. According to the plaintiff, the normal period of transit of goods was ten days and the goods were delivered as late as on 14.1.1979 at Shalimar. By that time market price of the goods had considerably fallen down and the plaintiff was required to sell the goods...
Rameshchandra S/O Ambalal Patel Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ271
ORDERK.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 7-8-1990 passed by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in Sessions Trial No. 242 of 1988 whereby the petitioner's objection that for reason of non-compliance with the proviso below Sub-section (2) of Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'the Code'), the committal order dated 4-10-1988 passed by the Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore, Under Section 203 ibid is vitiated and the Sessions Court could not take cognizance of the various offences against him, has been negatived.2. Circumstances giving rise to the revision petition are these: The Narcotic Inspector, Indore filed against the petitioner and his co-accused Salim Mohammad, the non-applicant No. 2, a criminal complaint in the Court of Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore alleging commission of offences Under Section 8/21 and other sections of the Narcotic Drugs and Psycho tropic Substances A...
Mehfuj HusaIn S/O Mustad Ahmad and anr. Vs. Kiran Bano D/O Akhtari Beg ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-1990
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ452
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. The judgment-debtors have approached this Court for the sixth time, aggrieved of an order passed on 10-8-1990 by the executing Court in Execution Case No. 8-A/1983x83, complaining that the executing Court illegally did not decide the objection under Section 47, Civil Procedure Code, about the executability of the decree, which according to the judgment-debtors, is a nullity.2. The execution case arose out of a decree passed in a suit instituted by the wife of judgment-debtor No. 1, who has deserted her. The suit was for recovery of the articles worth Rs. 80,000/-, which were illegally retained by the husband. The plaintiff averred that her marriage with judgment-debtor No. 1 took place on 25th September, 1981, according to Muslim rites by Nikah' in which Mahr (dower) of Rs. 20,500/- was agreed upon by judgment-debtor No. 1; because . the husband misbehaved with her, ill-treated her and created such circumstances that it was impossible for her to live with the husb...
Subuddh Kumar S/O Govind Prasad Vs. Jiwaji University and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ50
ORDERShri Arun Mishra, Counsel for the petitioner.Shri N.P. Mittal, Counsel for the University.Heard counsel.1. Annexure R-1 is the document, which has come from the University with its return. The short question is, if the notification which the University has issued on 18-9-1990 can constitutionally kill petitioner's entitlement to sit in the examination to be held in this month for certain category of candidates contemplated thereunder. We may refer to para 1 of the said notification as that projects manifestly and properly the vicious discrimination which petitioner has complained.2. In the return, it is submitted that on 4-8-1988, 5-8-1988 and 11-8-1988 'Standing Committee' had held meetings to give effect to Government of India's uniform policy in regard to 10 + 2 + 3 course and considered the effect thereof on 11 +3 system. It was decided that if any student appearing in First Year of Degree Course in 11 + 3 course system in 1989 fails, he would get a chance in 1990 and that wil...
Suresh Kumar Vs. Sandhya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-1990
Reported in: I(1991)DMC238; 1991(0)MPLJ259
K.L. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 9-3-1989 passed by the IIIrd Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Indore, in Case No. 3 of 1980 under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the act').2. Circumstances giving rise to the appeal are these : The present appellant instituted a suit against the respondent No. 1 under Section 9 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights alleging that she is his wife. In the suit, the respondent No. 1's parents have also been impleaded and relief of permanent injunction restraining the marriage of the respondent No. 1 has also been claimed.3. In the said suit, he filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 and Section 161 of the Civil Procedure Code; 1908 (for short 'the Code') for grant of temporary injunction, restraining the respondent No. 1's marriage till the disposal of the aforesaid suit.4. The respondent No. 1 filed her written statement denying the alleged marriage. The application for temp...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Laxman Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC88; 1991ACJ42
S.K. Dubey, J.1. Short contention of Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, is that on the date of accident, the insured Bijendrasingh, who is insured in the records of insurance company and the policy was issued in his name, covering risk of the vehicle No. CPH 5167, transferred the vehicle to one Ajit Kumar. As this was a suppression of the material fact, the policy lapsed from the date of transfer. The name of Ajit Kumar is also recorded in the records of Regional Transport Authority. Therefore, the Tribunal, without holding an enquiry, committed an illegality in passing order under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act').2. Mr. R.D. Jain, learned counsel for respondent No. 4, contended that this is not the appropriate stage where the defence under Section 96 (2) of the Act can be considered while deciding an application under Section 92-A of the Act. All the defences under Section 96 (2) of the Act will have to be tried and then decided after reco...
Dr. J.N. Seth Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP180; 1991(0)MPLJ98
K.L. Issrani, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 17-2-1990 passed by the Fifth Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 2-A of 1990 refusing to grant temporary injunction against the recovery of the telephone bills of the appellant.2. In this case, the respondents haveraised a preliminary objection that the application of the appellant for appointment of an arbitrator is not maintainable because the dispute is not covered under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. For deciding the preliminary objection, it is necessary to mention some facts here. The appellant was nominated as a member of the M. P. Telecom Advisory Committee on 28-6-1985. His term was extended up to 30-6-1989. In his capacity as a member of the M.P.T.A.C., a free telephone No. 28888 was provided to him and was installed at his residence. No rent was to be charged for the said telephone and 1200 local calls bimonthly were allowed...
Ram Kishan Balmukund Kushwaha Vs. Devilal Nandram Kushwah
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-1990
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ95
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. The petitioner, who is a plaintiff, instituted a suit against the respondents for declaration, partition and possession of his share in the suit property and permanent injunction. As the petitioner's annual income immediately preceding the date of presentation of the plaint, from all sources, did not exceed Rs. 6,000/-, the petitioner claimed exemption, from payment of court fees on the plainty in view of Notification No. F. No. 9.1.83-XXI dated the 1st April 1983, issued by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred by Section 35 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 (No. 7 of 1870), published in M. P. Rajpatra (Asadharan) dated 1st April 1983, at page 1062, reproduced in 1983 M. P. Law Times, Part II at page 91.2. Shri K. B. Chaturvedi contended that the plaintiff was entitled to an exemption from payment of court fees, as by the said Notification, the court fees was remitted in the whole of the State of Madhya Pradesh, as persons falling in the said categories ...
B.S. Adityan and ors. Vs. Fencing Association of India, Jabalpur and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-1990
Reported in: AIR1991MP316; 1991(0)MPLJ418
Faizanuddin, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of Madhya Pradesh High Court by the defendants has been directed against the orders passed on 29-6-1990 to 11-7-1990 by the learned single Judge of this Court in Misc. Appeal No. 227 of 1990.2. The facts in brief giving rise to this appeal may be stated thus: The Indian Olympic Association/respondent No. 3, herein, is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It consists of various Federations which are affiliated with the Indian Olympic Association. The Management of the Indian Olympic Association (hereinafter referred to as the 'I.O.A.') is controlled by a duly elected Executive Council in accordance with rules for a term of 4 years. A Special General Meeting may be summoned at any time by the President of I.O.A. at his discretion or it is convened on a written requisition signed by the Presidents and Secretaries of not less than 15 Member-Units within one month from the date of recei...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »