Madhya Pradesh Court January 1991 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.
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradip Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ254
T.N. Singh, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against whom decree has been passed for eviction from the suit-house and also for mesne profits. There is cross-objection also of the plaintiffs in regard to costs not awarded by the trial Court.2. Plaintiffs, twosome, brothers, claimed that they had purchased the suit property from defendant No. 3, Gyanchand Palta, by registered sale-deed dated 22-4-1975. Defendant No. 2, Shivpratap Singh, was impleaded because in the sale-deed it was stated that tenants were in possession of the house and they had been inducted by the mortgagee who was none else than late Raja Brijendra Singh predecessor-in-interest of Shivpratap Singh. It is not disputed that the suit-house is situating in Guna town and it is also not disputed that Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, for short, the Act, is in force there. However, plaintiffs based their suit not on any of the statutory grounds contemplated under the Act, but on the ground that the lesso...
Santosh Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1993ACJ627
B.C. Varma, Actg. C.J.1. This and the other connected appeals (Miscellanceous Appeal Nos. 272 of 1982 Surajkali v. Union of India, 273 of 1982 Dilip Kumar v. Union of India, 275 of 1982 Ashok Kumar v. Union of India and 276 of 1982 Kumari Sarla v. Union of India) which are all being disposed of by this order, are filed under Section 82-F (2) of the Indian Railways Act against orders whereby the appellants' claim has been dismissed by the Ad hoc Claims Commissioner, Railway Accident, Bilaspur, as barred by limitation.2. On 16.7.1981, railway accident took place as a result of which Surajbhan travelling in the train died and his minor sons and wife sustained injuries. By notification, dated 27.11.1981, Mr. V.C. Agarwal, the then Additional District Judge, was appointed as Ad hoc Claims Commissioner. He started functioning from. 1.3.1982. On 15.1.1982, application for compensation was filed jointly by Surajkali, widow of deceased Surajbhan and the appellants in all these appeals. All thes...
General Manager, Bank Note Press Vs. Chattar Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ903MP; 1991(0)MPLJ615
ORDERFaizanuddin, J.1. The Order passed in this petition will also govern the disposal of Misc. Petition No. 3399/86 (General Manager, Bank Note Press, Dewas v. M. Shariff and 22 Ors.) as well as Misc. Petition No. 3509 of 1986 (General Manager, Bank Note Press, Dewas v. Awatar Singh and 131 Ors.), as in all these petitions, filed by the Bank Note Press, Dewas, common questions of law and fact arise.2. In all these 3 petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the management of the Bank Note Press, Dewas, has challenged the common order dated 21st May, 1986 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur, allowing the applications of the respondents in 3 petitions, filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, granting their claim for overtime wages at double the normal rate of their wages. These 3 applications were registered by the tribunal as Application Nos. 135/85, 136/85 and 159/85.3. The case of the respondents in brief wa...
Gokul Prasad S/O Chandra Singh Vs. Ram Singh S/O Chunnilal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1991
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ405
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an appeal Under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (now repealed by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988) by the claimant/appellant against the order dated 7-12-1984 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, East Nimar (Khandwa), whereby his claim was totally rejected on the ground that he failed to prove that Truck No. C.P.D. 8147, driven, owned and insured by the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively, was involved in the accident.2. The undisputed facts are that on 2-11-1982 at about 5 O'clock in the day time, while the claimant was going on a bicycle from Harsood to village Sadiyaoani a truck coming from opposite direction, suddenly crossed, hitting him with such a force on his left arm that his left hand was instantaneously chopped off at the place of the accident.3. The claimant's case was that Madhukar Rao (P.W.5), who was also passing by, soon after the accident helped the claimant in rushing him first to the Police Station and immediate...
Gokul Prasad Vs. Ram Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1991
Reported in: II(1991)ACC606; 1992ACJ459
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (now repealed by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988) by the claimant/appellant against the order dated 7.12.1984 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, East Nimar (Khandwa), whereby his claim was totally rejected on the ground that he failed to prove that truck No. CPD 8147, driven, owned and insured by the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively, was involved in the accident.2. The undisputed facts are that on 2nd November, 1982, at about 5 o'clock in the daytime, while the claimant was going on a bicycle from Harsood to village Sadiyaoani a truck coming from opposite direction suddenly crossed, hitting him with such a force on his left arm that his left hand was instantaneously chopped off at the place of the accident.3. The claimant's case was that Madhukar Rao, PW 5, who was also passing by, soon after the accident helped the claimant in rushing him first to the police station and immediately ...
Administrator City of Indore Nagar Palika Nigam Vs. Rannsingh S/O Saul ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-1991
Reported in: II(1991)ACC498
ORDERA.G. Qureshi, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Indore (Labour Court) in Case No. 4/W.C. Act/78-Fatal.2. The facts leading to this appeal, in short, are that one Rannsingh and Smt. Bhura wife of Rannsingh had filed an application, under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act before the lower court claiming compensation of Rs. 13,500/- on the ground that the m Municipal Corporation, Indore owns the Nehrau Stadium and the land adjacent to that Stadium. On the land adjacent to the Stadium the corporation decided to construct a Badminton Hall, the construction of which started in the month of April, 1977. The contract for the construction of the aforesaid hall was given to respondents Nos 3 and 4. That one Suratiya was employed as a labourer by the contractors and while working as such labourer he fell down from the scaffolding due to which he received injuries to which he succumbed. The montly i...
Krishna W/O Dharam Raj JaIn Vs. Dharam Raj S/O Laxmi Chand Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-04-1991
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ451
P.C. Pathak, J.1. This is reference made by one of us (Pathak, J.) to Division Bench to answer the following questions :-'(i) Whether recording of reasons is sine qua non for awarding maintenance from the date of application?(ii) If so, whether the order must be modified, making it payable from the date of order?(iii) Whether the 'date of order' in Section 125(2) means the date of order of the Revisional Court also'?2. Smt. Krishnabai was married to non-applicant Dharamraj 16 years before the date of petition in accordance with Hindu Rites. She alleged that when Ku. Kalpana applicant No. 2 was in the womb, the non-applicant snatched her ornaments and forced her to return to her parents. After the birth of the child, she requested him to take her back, but he gave no response. The applicant with her child continues to stay with her parents. On 4-6-1982 the applicant and her child filed petition Under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code before the Chief Judicial Magistrate claiming main...
Smt. Krishna JaIn Vs. Dharam Raj Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-04-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1028
P.C. Pathak, J.1. This is reference made by one of us (Pathak-J) to Division Bench to answer the following questions :--(i) whether recording of reasons is sine qua non for awarding maintenance from the date of application?(ii) If so, whether the order must be modified, making it payable from the date of order?(iii) Whether the 'date of order' in Section 125(2) means the date of order of the Revisional Court also'?2. Smt. Krishnabai was married to non-applicant Dharamraj 16 years before the date of petition in accordance with Hindu Rites. She alleged that when Ku. Kalpana applicant No. 2 was in the womb, the non-applicant snatched her ornaments and forced her to return to her parents. After the birth of the child, she requested him to take her back, but he gave no response. The applicant with her child continues to stay with her parents. On 4-6-1982 the applicant and her child filed petition Under Section 125, Cr. P.C. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate claiming maintenance @ Rs. 400...
Gangaram @ Gangadhar S/O Nathulal and anr. Vs. Shrikrishnadas S/O Munn ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-1991
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ595
S.D. Jha, J. 1. This Second Appeal filed by the plaintiffs/landlord (hereinafter called, the plaintiffs) against the judgment and decree dated 14-3-1985 reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Court in plaintiffs' favour was by order dated 19-9-1985 admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of law arising for decision in the appeal:'1. Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Court below erred in holding that the plaintiffs' suit was barred by limitation? 2. Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Court below erred in holding that the plaintiffs had failed to make out a case for eviction on the grounds specified in Section 12(1)(e)(g) and (h) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Court below erred in rejecting an application filed under Order 41, Rule 27 Civil Procedure Code submitted by the plaintiffs?' The plaintiffs' case is that by r...
Keshav Devi Mishra Vs. Pradeep Kumar Mishra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-1991
Reported in: II(1991)DMC284
D.M. Dharmadaikari, J.1. This is an appeal by the wife under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1958 (in short 'the Act'), against the judgment and decree of divorce dated 13.10.1988 passed by Additional District Judge Sedhora, Camp Katni, for alleged grounds said to have been proved against the wife of desertion and cruelty.2. The husband sought decree of divorce on pleadings inter alia that the parties were married on 1.5.1982 and they have a female child aged about three years. The allegations of cruelty against the wife are that she always ill-treated the husband and his parents and used to abuse them and assault the husband. It was also pleaded that in November 1983, the wife on the pretext of visiting her maternal uncle left with her father from the matrimonial home at Katni for Sagar and never returned thereafter. She took along with her all her clothes, ornaments and Rs. 5000/- in cash. The husband also alleged to have made attempts to bring her back, but she refused.3. The ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »