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.
Udairam S/O Balkishan Joshi Vs. Mohammadusman S/O Shakhrehman and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ925
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award given by the Third Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore, in Claim Case No. 182 of 1980 dated 25-2-1982.2. The short facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant filed the claim petition before the lower Tribunal under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act on the allegations that on 27-3-1980, the appellant was going on his bicycle towards Premsukh talkies coming from Nandlalpura Chauraha. When he reached the Nandlalpura bridge, the respondent No. 1 while driving matador No. CPF-8809 rashly and negligently reached the spot and dashed the matador against the bicycle and the appellant due to which the appellant received about 22 injuries on his body and both side of his ribs were fractured. The appellant was employed as a peon in the District Excise Office. Due to the injuries, he suffered physical and mental agony and also incurred loss of earning. He, therefore, claimed Rs. 20,000/- as compensation. The res...
Udairam Vs. Mohammad Usman and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ431
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award given by the Third Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, in Claim Case No. 182 of 1980, dated 25.2.1982.2. The short facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant filed the claim petition before the lower Tribunal under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act on the allegations that on 27.3.1980, the appellant was going on his bicycle towards Premsukh Talkies coming from Nandlalpura Chauraha. When he reached the Nandlalpura bridge, the respondent No. 1 while driving Matador No. CPF 8809 rashly and negligently reached the spot and dashed the Matador against the bicycle and the appellant due to which the appellant received about 22 injuries on his body and both sides of his ribs were fractured. The appellant was employed as a peon in the District Excise Office. Due to the injuries, he suffered physical and mental agony and also incurred loss of earnings. He, therefore, claimed Rs. 20,000- as compensation. The ...
Jaidayal Ramswarup Gupta and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ941
ORDERS.K. Chawla, J.1. By this revision the applicants challenge the appellate order passed Under Section 454, Criminal Procedure Code for disposal of property.2. The applicants were alleged to have illegally purchased on 17-6-1982 Sal Seeds weighing 78 quintals 10 Kg. in 94 bags and also transporting them without permit in village Bargarh, P. S. Jaitpur, District Shahdol. After trial, the applicants were acquitted of the offence Under Section 27(g) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. The learned Magistrate directed the return of Sal Seeds to the applicants. The Forest Department took appeal against order about disposal of property to Sessions Judge, Shahdol. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge directed confiscation of Sal Seeds in favour of the State Government. Aggrieved by that order, the present revision has been filed.3. A perusal of the appellate order of the learned Sessions Judge will show that it was based on the premise that Sal Seeds are 'specified forest produce' by virtue of ...
Jaidayal and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ3272
ORDERS.K. Chawla, J.1. By this revision the applicants challenge the appellate order passed Under Section 454, Cr. P.C. for disposal of property.2. The applicants were alleged to have illegally purchased on 17-6-1982 sal seeds weighing 78 quintals, 10 Kgs. in 94 bags and also transporting them without permit in village Sargarh, P.S. Jaitpur, District Shahdol. After trial, the applicants were acquitted of the offence under Section 27(g) of the Forest Act, 1927. The learned Magistrate directed the return of Sal Seeds to the applicants. The Forest Department took appeal against order about disposal of property to Sessions Judge, Shahdol. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge directed confiscation of Sal Seeds in favour of the State Government. Aggrieved by that order, the present revision has been filed.3. A perusal of the appellate order of the learned Sessions Judge will show that it was based on the premise that Sal Seeds are 'specified forest produce' by virtue of notification issued u...
Smt. Alka Sharma Vs. Abhinesh Chandra Sharma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: AIR1991MP205; I(1992)DMC96; 1991(0)MPLJ625
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. This is an appeal by the wife/respondent under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), against the decree dated 5-5-89 passed by the Court of Second Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Raipur, declaring her marriage with the respondent/ wife as nullity under Section 12(1)(b) and (c) of the Act. By the judgment and decree under appeal, the trial Court accepted the case of the husband/ plaintiff that the wife was suffering from the mental disorder of the type 'schizophrenia' at the time of their marriage.2. The facts not in dispute are that the parties were married on 22-5-1986. They lived together immediately after the marriage between 23-5-1986 and 4-6-1986 for about 12 days in the first instance. Thereafter the wife had gone back to her parents for a few days and they again in the second period lived together between 13-7-86 and 20-7-86 for about seven days. The total stay of the wife with the husband wa...
Vijay Laxmi Vs. Yogesh Janardan Naidu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: I(1992)DMC548
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an appeal by the wife under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short 'the Act'), against the decree of restitution of conjugal rights, granted in favour of the respondent husband under Section 9 of the Act, by judgment dated 4.5.1989 of the Court of 4th Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur.2. The marriage between the parties took place on 28.5.1983 at Kamptee, district Nagpur in the State of Maharashtra. They lived together at Kamptee between 28.5.1983 and 9.6.1983 and then shifted to Jabalpur on 10.6.1983 where the husband is employed as a tracer in the office of the Executive Engineer, P.W.D. The wife had, for a few days gone to her parents' house and lived there between 6.7.1983 to 30.9.1983. The wife again lived with the husband between 30.9.1983 to 23.10.1983. Thereafter she went along with her father to Kamptee and never returned to the husband's place at Jabalpur.3. The case of the husband is that the wife left wi...
Shri Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: 1992(38)ECC135
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. This order passed in M.P.No. 520 of 1990, will also govern the disposal of all the petitions mentioned above, as in all these petitions the common question involved is, whether Central Excise duty should be collected from the petitioners in respect of their manufactured textured dyed waste or textured waste at take-up stage or at the stage when these are in the furnished (sic) and marketable condition. By order/notice-filed as Annexure-A to each of the petition, stand of the Central Excise Department has been that duty is collectable at take-up stage and not at the stage when the product is in the finished and marketable condition.2. In Misc. Petition No. 535 of 1990, penalty of Rs. 1000/-, under Rule 210, read with Rule 53 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, has been imposed against the petitioners. The allegation is that by not accounting for their product at the intermediate stage- take-up stage and paying duty at that point, the petitioners violated Rule 53 of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›