Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Ramesh 'Chanchal' Vs. Town Improvement Trust, Ratlam and Anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1991
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ343
V.D. Gyani, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who claims to be a Journalist, prays for a direction to respondent No. 1 to refund the amount of interest collected by it from the petitioner, by quashing the Resolution, Annexure-P/8.2. A few fact may now be seen : Town Improvement Trust Ratlam, a statutory body incorporated under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Town Improvement Trust Act, 1960, developed Scheme No. 20 -- popularly known as 'Shastrinagar Colony', wherein the petitioner was also allotted a plot, after much correspondence and State intervention, as averred by him, subject to certain conditions stated therein. The letter of allotment has been filed as Annexure-P/1, to the petition.3. It has been contended by the petitioner that respondent No. 1 could not charge interest from the petitioner when the matter about its fixation was pending before the respondents I and 2 and as the aforesaid correspondence between the respondent...
Maharu and ors. Vs. Dhansai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1991
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ464
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This second appeal is by the defendants, against whom a decree of mandatory injunction has been granted by the two Courts below.2. Admittedly, the appellants are members of a coparcenary. The respondent (plaintiffs) by registered sale deed dated 13/5/1981 (Ex. P/I) purchased from the appellant No. 1, Maharu, the alleged manager of the coparcenery, two acres of land out of khasra No. 5/1-k total area 7.39 acres. The plaintiffs as purchasers claimed to have been placed in possession of the lands purchased by them. The cause of action for the suit was said to have been arisen because the defendants (i.e. appellants Nos. 2 to 4), under a claim that the property was an undivided coparcenery property, tried to take forcible possession of the lands from the plaintiffs/purchasers. The two Courts below held that the purchasers' possession can be protected by grant of a decree of mandatory injunction.3. For the purpose of this second appeal facts not in dispute, and on w...
Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co., Indore Vs. Gangabai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ106; AIR1991MP323; 1993(0)MPLJ233
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. The appellant Insurance Company has filed this appeal aggrieved by the Award dated 23-7-81, passed by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 136 of 1979.2. The facts leading to this appeal, in short, are that the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 had filed a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for awarding compensation amounting to Rs. 30,000/-. The case of the respondents Nos. 1 and 2, in brief, before the lower Tribunal was that on 30-3-1979, tanker No. MPG 7685 of the ownership of respondent No. 3 and respondent No. 4 being its driver was parked on the road in front of the workshop of respondents Nos. 5 and 6 and some welding work was being carried on on the aforesaid tanker. At that time the deceased with one Ramlal was going towards Naulakha at about 3 p.m. When they were near the tanker the diesel tank exploded and on account of which the deceased received serious burn injuries. The deceased was treated at the M...
Mohanlal Hargovinddas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1991
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ371
B.C. Varma, J. 1. At the instance of the assessee, M/s. Mohanlal Har-govinddas, Jawaharganj, Jabalpur, the following two questions of law have been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the inference drawn by the Tribunal that the payment of Rs. 36,292 made by the assessee to Shri Parmanandbhai Patel was prompted by extra-commercial considerations is justified ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee to deduct a sum of Rs. 36,292 representing payment to Sri Parmanandbhai in computation of its business income is allowable ?' 2. The assessee is a partnership firm. It had two partners : (1) Smt. Ujjambai, and (2) Shri Parmanandbhai Patel. Later, a third person, by name, Shravankumar, also joined the partnership. Parmanandbhai Patel became partner of the firm on June 21, 1961. He, however, withdrew from the partnership in September, 1963, as he wanted to ...
Western Railway Vs. Chandrabai and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1991
Reported in: II(1992)ACC615; 1992ACJ496; [1992(65)FLR541]; (1993)IIILLJ911MP
A.G. Qureshi, J. 1. This appeal has been filed aggrieved by the award of compensation dated 29th January, 1982, by Shri A.N. Sorti, Commissioner for Workmen's Compenstion, Indore, in case No. 18/W.C.Act/78-Fatal.2. The facts leading to this appeal, in short, are that the non-applicant, Chandrabai, claiming as widow of the deceased, Tolaram, had filed an application under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, before the lower Court and claimed Rs. 19,200 as compensation. According to her, her husband, Tolaram, was in employment of non-applicant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and was working as a loco attendant. On the intervening night of 11th June, 1976, and 12th June, 1976, the deceased, when he was going from his house to attend to his duty in the railway colony, met with an accident and succumbed to the injuries received during the accident. As the railway administration had not provided any residential facility to the workman in the railway premise, he had to live outside the railwa...
Radhakishan Narayandas (Partnership Firm) Vs. Manmohan Garg
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1991
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ909
T.N. Singh, J.1. An action for infringement of trade mark and for passing off came to be tried in the plaintiff's suit instituted in the Court of District Judge, Bhopal, on 24-10-1969. Against the judgment and decree passed on 16-3-1981 by learned District Judge, Vidisha in Civil Suit No. 19A of 1970, the instant appeal is preferred by the plaintiff on his suit being dismissed in toto.2. Shortly put, the plaintiff's case is that the trade mark 'Khargosh Chhap' label was first registered with the Sub-Registrar of Bombay on 26-1-1928 and thereafter under the Trade Marks Act, 1940, it was registered on 14-8-1945 in respect of bidis to be sold under that trade mark throughout India except Madras and Mysore. The Registration number of the label was 112689. Subsequently, the jhilli(tissue-paper wrapper) was also got registered on 2-7-1954 and it was allotted Registration No. 164797. Both registrations were duly renewed from time to time. Looking to the popularity, reputation and huge sale co...
Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Bhaysingh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ1151
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 3.11.1981 passed by the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ujjain, Mr. LJ. Mandlik, in Claim Case No. 35 of 1979 awarding Rs. 22,500/-to the respondent as compensation for the permanent disability due to injury on his leg and pain and suffering.2. The respondent had filed a claim petition before the lower court claiming Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation on the allegation that on 7.8.1978 he was going in a bus bearing No. MPH 4714 of the appellant from village Patpala to Ujjain. He had also purchased a ticket in the bus. The bus was being driven by the non-applicant No. 2, Babukhan, rashly and negligently due to which, near village Pawasa on Ujjain Road, the bus collided against a tree and as a result of the collision, the rear wheel of the bus got burst. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the passengers travelling in the bus received injuries and the applicant also received serious injuries on different parts of ...
Kanhaiyallal and 3 ors. Vs. the UjjaIn Vikas Pradhikaran, Dewas Rd., U ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1991
Reported in: AIR1991MP290; 1994(0)MPLJ315
V.S. Kokje, J. 1. This is one of the three petitions challenging the scheme No. 23 of the Ujjain Development Authority. The other petitions are Misc. Petition No. 1707/86 (Raj Kumar Johri v. The Ujjain Vikas Pradhikaran and others) and Misc. Petition No. 1746/86 (Bansidhar v. The Ujjain Vikas Pradhikaran). Since the petitions raised common points, they were heard together and are being decided by this common order. This order shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Petition No. 1707/86 and Misc. Petition No. 1746/86.2-3. The contention of the petitioners in short is that they hold land in village Nanakheda Tehsil and District Ujjain. On 23rd Sept. 1977 a notification dated 18-8-1977 under the purported exercise of powers Under Section 50(2) of the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Niwesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter called 'the Adhiniyam') was published in the M.P. Gazette, declaring the intention of the Ujjain Development Authority (U.D. A. for short) to prepare a Town Development Scheme for remo...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rajjak and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1991
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas755(MP)
1. Heard Shri Dandawate, learned counsel for the appellants.2. Both these appeals, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by the insurer, arise out of the same award dated December 22, 1989, passed on a bunch of claim petitions, arising out of the same accident.3. Appeal No. 213 of 1990 relates to the claimant, Bhanwarbai, in Claim Case No. 2 of 1988 while Appeal No. 210 of 1990 relates to Rajjak's claim in Case No. 15 of 1988.4. The only point raised by the appellants' counsel in both these appeals is that the claimants having admitted the extent of the insurer's liability which, according to the appellants, was Rs. 50,000 only, the appellants cannot be held liable beyond that.5. Going through the impugned award, particularly, the issue part thereof, there was no such issue raised so far as Claim Case No. 15 of 1988 (relating to M. A. No. 210 of 1990 against the claimant, Bhanwarbai (respondent No. 1 in M. A. No. 213 of 1990), no such plea was raised.6. Learned counsel cit...
Ambaram @ Ashok Kumar Vs. Smt. Janki Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1991
Reported in: II(1991)DMC298
M.W. Deo, J. 1. This petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the order of the revisional Court upholding the order of maintenance passed by the trial Court under Section 125 Ibid.2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that the respondent was wedded to the petitioner at a very -tender age. After a short stay, she was deserted and was forced to live with her parents for almost 12 years. In the meanwhile the petitioner is alleged to have taken another wife. It is alleged that he drove away the second wife and then brought back the first one namely the respondent. The respondent conceived from the husband but it resulted in abortion. This happened in 1986.3. It is alleged that the petitioner then again treated respondent with cruelty and neglected to maintain her resulting in her compulsory departure to her parents.4. It is on these facts that the learned trial Court ordered grant of maintenance of Rs. 250/- per month to the respondent from the date of pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »