Madhya Pradesh Court October 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.
S. Ram, Principal Vs. G.P. Shrivastava, Registrar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ49
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Satpula Girls Higher Secondary School, Jabalpur is a Government aided education 'institution' within the meaning of the provisions contained in M. P. Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmchariyaon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) Adhiniyam, 1978 (shortly hereinafter referred to as the Act). The above institution is run by minority community of Protestant Christians through a registered society under the M. P. Registrikaran Adhiniyam named Nagpur Diocesan Board of Education, Jabalpur (shortly referred hereinafter as N.D.B.E.). The petitioner worked as Principal of the above school and claimed to be fully governed, in the matter of her service conditions, by the provisions of the rules framed under the Act. The rules are named M. P. Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ko Padachyut Karne/Sewa Se Hatane Sambandhi Prakriya) Niyam, 1983.2. The petitioner initially challenged in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...
Premier Auto Industries and ors. Vs. Bharat Raj Goyal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ734
ORDERT.N. Singh, J.1. This is plaintiffs' appeal and it arises out of a temporary injunction matter. Although plaintiffs/appellants are threesome, the real man who has taken up the cudgel is plaintiff/appellant No. 2 Prem Kumar Oberoi and on the other side, similarly, it is defendant No. 2, K, V. Sachdev who has to bear the brunt of the attack. Paradoxically, however, in the instant appeal, relief is claimed mainly against defendants/respondents 3 and 4, corporate bodies; No. 3, is 'Press Area Branch, New Delhi' and No. 4 is 'Jayendraganj Branch, Gwalior', both of the same nationalised Bank, Central Bank of India.2. When the suit was instituted on 16-8-1989, the Bank was not impleaded; inly on 15-3-1990, the two branches of the Central Bank of India were impleaded as defendants 3 and 4. Significantly, an order of ad interim temporary injunction was obtained by the plaintiffs on 18-8-1989 for maintaining 'status quo' which appears to have been modified On 5-12-1990 in view of subsequent...
Dr. Akhil Kumar Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2029
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. Aggrieved by his conviction for an offence Section 312, read with Section 511, I.P.C. and sentence of R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, the appellant has preferred this criminal appeal.2. The appellant was holding a decree of B.A.M.S. from the Mahaloshal Board of Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicine and was running his dispensary at Nagpur, district Shahdol. It was alleged that the deceased Maiti Baiga was living separately from her husband for about a period of 3 to 4 years. While so living, she conceived a child as a result of her illicit relations with one of her distant cousins. She wanted to get rid of the child in her womb and for that purpose went to the hospital of the appellant on 8-9-1982 in the company of her mother Baijanti (P.W. 1) and brother-in-law Dhanu (P.W. 10). The appellant settled and realised his fee of Rs. 160/- from Dhanu, gaved one injection of Menstrogen Forte to the deceased and asked her to come again on the next day. On 9-9-198...
Sushil Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-10-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ471
ORDERT.N. Singh, J.1. Two learned Judges of this Court who heard this petition, having disagreed on a vital question of constitutional import, this matter has come up before me to resolve the conflict, on an order passed by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice in that regard. The Presiding Judge (K. M. Agrawal, J.) has dismissed, by his order dated 26-3-1991, the writ petition holding that by efflux of time, the petition had become infructuous and further that in the changed circumstances, alternative remedy of civil suit was available. His Companion Judge (K. M. Pandey, J.), on the other hand, by his order dated 27-3-1991, held that the preliminary objection to the maintainability of the petition had no force and the petition should be heard on merits. Accordingly, the learned Judges recorded jointly the order that they had reached different conclusions in their separate orders on the preliminary objection about maintainability of the petition and as such the controversy needed to be resolve...
Satish Chandra S/O Babulal Agarwal Vs. Janki Prasad S/O Udaijit Tiwari
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ90
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. This second appeal by the tenant against the affirming judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court was admitted for hearing on 25-3-1985 on the following two substantial questions of law : -1. 'Whether, in the absence of there being a clear plea on the point, the relief of eviction could not be granted to the plaintiff on the ground specified in clause (a) of Section 12(1) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act ?'2. 'Whether the plaintiff could not be granted the relief of eviction on the ground specified in clause (ft of Section 12(1) of the Act for the reason that the circumstances established from the evidence produced in the case negatived the requirement of the plaintiff under the said clause ?'2. It was not disputed that the suit accommodation was let out for non-residential purpose on a monthly rent of Rs. 55/-. The municipal taxes were payable by the tenant. C. S. No. 56-A/7'7 for arrears of rent for the period l-7i1976 to 31-10-1976 and for ejectment of...
Guddi Bai Vs. Puran Sai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1991
Reported in: I(1992)DMC545; 1992(0)MPLJ211
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. This is objector's appeal under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, (in short, the 'Act'), against grant of succession certificate to the respondent in respect of certain amounts payable to the deceas-Budha Bahadur.2. Budha Bahadur was working as Section Guard in Korea Colliery of the South Eastern Coal-fields Ltd. He died on 28-10-1988. After his death, his father Amar Sai and brother Pooran Sai applied for succession certificate under Section 372 of the Act in the Court of Additional District Judge, Manendragarh, Circuit Baikunthpur, District Sarguja. It was registered as Succession Case No. 2 of 1989. The father Amar Sai died during pendency of the proceedings and his name was struck out. The appellant came forward to object the grant of succession certificate to the respondent by claiming herself to be the widow of the deceased. Her claim was rejected and succession certificate was directed to be issued in favour of the respondent by the impugned orde...
State of Madhya Pradesh and ors. Vs. Kaushlesh S/O Banshidhar Dwivedi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ55
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. This first appeal by the defendants is directed against the impugned judgment and decree of the Court below, declaring the plaintiff to have become Bhumiswami of the suit land and injuncting the defendants from interfering with his alleged possession over the suit land.2. The respondent claimed that 60' x 40' land forming part of Survey No. 474 situated at village Teothar, district Rewa (in short, the 'suit land') was gifted to his father Banshidhar Dwivedi by the then Pattedar in 1955. In 1955 the land came in Abadi. In 1978-79 he constructed 2 rooms over 30' x 15' of land and took actual physical possession of the entire suit land. His father could not get the land mutated in his name during his life time and by mistake the land was recorded as Government land. By notice dated 2-1-1986 the appellant No. 4 Tahsildar asked him to stop construction over the suit land, although the construction was made long before the date of notice. It was further alleged that on 17-...
inder Jit Kumar S/O Sant Bakhsh Ji Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ229
ORDERV.S. Kokje, J.1. This is a petition by a Commissioned Officer of the Indian Army challenging the proceedings of Court-Martial initiated against him. The petitioner was commissioned in the Indian Army on 14th December, 1958 as a Second Lieutenant. Gradually he rose to his present substantive rank of Brigadier. From Feb., 1988 to April 1989, he was posted at Agra as Commandant Para Regimental Centre. In April, 1989 he was given acting rank of Major General and was posted as General Officer Commanding Vth Mountain Division in Eastern Command.2. In July, 1989 the petitioner was called to Agra as a witness in Court Martial proceedings going on against one Major Mahapatra. He reported for this purpose on 13-7-1989 at Agra. After the petitioner left Agra in April 1989, Brig. Lognathan took charge as Commandant Para Regimental Centre at Agra. He reported certain financial irregularities and a Court of Enquiry was instituted to enquire into the financial irregularities in the Para Regiment...
General Mines and Quarries Ltd. Vs. Kartar Singh Prem Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-04-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ563
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. This second appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the reversing judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court. It was admitted for hearing on 29-9-1977 on the questions raised in paragraph 7 of the memo of appeal. The following questions of law were proposed in paragraph 7 of the memo of second appeal : -'(i) Whether in absence of plea and proof of the essential ingredients (Nec vi, Nec clam, Nec Precario) of adverse possession the suit can be held to be time barred?'(ii) Whether the character of the possession prior to 8-11-1960 or 11-9-1962 being on the Defendant's own showing as that of agent or of a person claiming subordinate title, can be considered to be adverse in character and the suit can be held to be time barred?'(iii) Whether the construction put on Exs.P.7 and P.22 is erroneous and has resulted in failure of justice?'On 3-9-1991, LA. No. 6638/91 was filed on behalf of the appellant for permission to urge the following additional question of law...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›