Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
Kishanchand S/O Lavvuram Punjabi Vs. Ramkrishna S/O Purushottamdas Vai ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1991
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ655
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. The defendant/tenant has come up in appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court directing his ejectment from the suit accommodation, non-residential one, under Section 12(1)(b) and (f) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The scope of the hearing in appeal stands circumscribed, as will be noticed hereafter.2. Admittedly, the appellant was a tenant in the suit accommodation owned by the plaintiff/respondent. The trial Court dismissed the suit for eviction. On appeal preferred by the landlord/respondent, the lower appellate Court allowed the appeal and held that grounds for ejectment, both under Clauses (b) and (f) of Sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act, were made out on evidence.3. The appeal was preferred on 2-7-1977. However, the decree was already executed and the possession delivered to the plaintiff/respondent on 20-3-1977.4. On 21-8-1978, when the appeal came up for hearing on the ...
M.P. Laghu Udhog Nigam Maryadit, Bhopal and anr. Vs. Gwalior Steel Sal ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-18-1991
Reported in: AIR1992MP215
T.N. Singh, J. 1. This appeal is by defendants against whom a decree for a sum of Rs. 22,858.72 is passed in a suit claiming illegal deduction from bill amounts.2. About the core fact that the plaintiff/respondent was a dealer in iron and steel goods and that some supplies were made by him to different departments of the State Government under orders made in that regard by the defendants/appellants, there is no dispute. However, contentions which Shri Roman, appearing for the defendants/ appellants has pressed are serious, substantial though, according to Shri Naik, those are technical. True, one of Shri Roman's contention is answered satisfactorily by Shri Naik on behalf of plaintiffs/respondents and about that, few words may be said in the beginning.3. Admittedly, the suit, as framed and instituted, was in the name of 'M/s. Gwalior Iron and Steel Industries, Lohiya Bazar, Lashkar, Gwalior, Registered Partnership Firm, through Partner Rambabu Goyal'. Later, it transpired that there wa...
Soosy W/O J.D. Thomas Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-18-1991
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ853
ORDERK.K. Varma, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is by a Government servant to whom permission/sanction was 'accorded' by respondent No. 3 the Director of Public Instructions, M. P., Bhopal, by the order dated 4-12-1981 (Annexure P-2) to retire voluntarily from the post of Lecturer with effect from 1-9-1974.2. The petitioner has sought suitable writs, orders or directions against the respondents to expedite the issuance of the pension payment order and the order for payment of the death-cum-gratuity and make the payments thereunder at the earliest, and to award her interest thereon @ Rs. 12% per annum and exemplary costs.3. It is an admitted fact that the Pension Payment Order and the order for payment of death-cum-retirement gratuity have not been issued to the petitioner so far.4. The following facts constituting the entire cause of action leading to the filing of the present petition are not in dispute. Petitioner Smt. Soosy Thomas, who hails from the State ...
Neeraj Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-18-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2549
V.D. Gyani, J.1. This death reference Under Section 366(1), Cr. P.C. by IXth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore is heard along with Criminal Appeal No. 90/91, preferred by accused Neeraj against his conviction and sentence of death Under Section 302, I.P.C. as recorded by the trial Court vide its judgment dated 26th February, 1991 passed in S.T. No. 65/89. It's a case of double murder. The place of occurrence is House No. 46, New Dewas Road, Indore; time night intervening 21st and 22nd of December, 1988. A couple Prakash s/o Dwarkadas Agarwal aged about 36 years and his wife Smt. Premlata Agarwal aged about 33 years were done to death. Deceased Prakash was found to be having apart from two minor abrasions, as many as ten incised wounds on his head allegedly inflicted with an axe, while his wife Premlata as throttled to death. Thumb pressure marks on her neck with nail scratches were observed on lower part of the neck.2. First Information Report, Ex. P/1 was lodged at 8-40 a.m. on 22-12-...
Ashok Kumar Vs. District Industries Officer and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-1991
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas669(MP)
V.D. Gyani, J.1. Shri Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner.2. Shri Zelavat, learned counsel for the respondent-bank, and Shri T. N. Singh, learned Deputy Advocate-General, for the State.3. They are heard.4. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner who is an unemployed person prays for a direction to the respondents for grant of loan under the self-employment scheme.5. The petitioner's case for grant of loan was not recommended by the bank. Referring to annexure A/4, Shri Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, invited our attention to an endorsement made thereon. This endorsement reads as follows :'The applicant has approached us with a request that his loan report under survey has not been considered last year since he had no experience in brick manufacturing while he was working as watch maker ; if he has experience in this line, his case may be considered on merits and that if you fully satisfy with other submit information...
Prem W/O Pooranchand Kheda Vs. Shree Sanatan Dharam Shiksha Samiti and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ198
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The petitioner who worked as teacher-in-charge in the school managed and administered by respondent Educational Society by name Shri Sanatan Dharam Shiksha Samiti, for a period of about ten years, challenges in this petition the inpugned order dated 23-10-1981 (Annexure-L) and the order dated 8-11-1981 (Annexure-B), terminating her sendees from the school.2. Law is now settled that a registered educational society, receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government and controlled in the matters of its management and service conditions of its employees, governed by the provisions of an enactment such as, in the present case, by Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shishan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmchariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) Adhiniyam, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is amenable to writ jurisdiction of this Court. (See : Francis John v. Director of Education and Ors., AIR 1990 SC 423).3. The petitioner was appointed in the school pursuant to an a...
Satish Suman (Dr.) Vs. Director, Medical Education and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-1991
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ377
ORDERV.S. Kokje, J. 1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M. P. No. 608 of 1991 (Rajaram S/o Heeralalji Bedia v. Director, Medical Education, Bhopal and 3 Ors). The petitioner in this case belongs to Scheduled Caste and having passed his M.B.B.S. examination in the year 1988 and having completed his internship in the year 1989, has also completed house job in the month of Dec. 1990. The petitioner was desirous of being admitted to a Post Graduate Degree/Diploma course in the M.G.M. Medical College, Indore. He could not get admission under the Scheduled Caste quota because respondent No. 4, Dr. Rajaram Bedia, also a member of Scheduled Caste was doing his house job during the year 1990 and was higher in merit than the petitioner.2. According to the petitioner, the respondent No. 4, Dr. Rajaram Bedia could not complete his house job during the calendar year 1990 because of his long absence due to an unfortunate illness and, therefore, the petitioner had a right to be admitted i...
State of Madhya Pradesh Through the Manager, Government Milk Scheme, S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-1991
Reported in: 1993ACJ116
K.L. Issrani, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated 7.4.1984 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Seoni, in Motor Claim Case No. 20 of 1983. The respondents have also filed cross objection for grant of the balance amount claimed.2. The deceased Prashant Madhukar Deshmukh was working as a Supervisor in Milk Collection Scheme, Seoni. On 28.12.1982, the deceased had gone to Lakhuadaun in Government vehicle No. MPZ 5951 belonging to the appellants. The vehicle was being driven by the driver Latif. The appellant Nos. 1 to 3 are the owners of the vehicle. Near village Chhapara, about 32 km. away from Seoni, the vehicle dashed against a big tree. The deceased received serious and fatal injuries. Consequently he died on the spot. The driver Latif also died on the next day. Respondent No. 1, Madhukar, is the father and the respondent No. 2, Shobhana, is the mother of the deceased Prashant. The respondent Nos. 3 to 6 are brothers a...
Sahodra Devi Agrawal Vs. Ramnarayan Satyanarayan (Firm) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1991
Reported in: I(1992)ACC113; 1991(0)MPLJ942
ORDERK.L. Issrani, J.1. This is an appeal Under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the Award dated 12-3-1987, passed in Claim Case No. 21 of 1986 by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur.2. The appellant had filed a claim petition Under Section 110-A of the Act before the Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, claiming Rs. 60,000/- on account of the death of her husband late Shri Hanuman Prasad Agrawal due to rash and negligent driving by respondent No. 2 Pritam Singh, who was driver of truck No. MTG 3178. The truck is owned by respondent No. 1 Firm. It is insured with respondent No. 3 New India Assurance Company Ltd. Respondent No. 4 Gyarsilal is the son of late Hanuman Prasad. Respondents Nos. 2 and 4 remained ex parte before the Claims Tribunal.3. Case of the appellant is that her husband Hanuman Prasad was working as Munim with the respondent No. 1. In the intervening night of 31-5-1984 and 1-6-1984 he was crushed by the truck No. MTG 317...
Sahodra Devi Vs. Ramnarayan Satyanarayan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1991
Reported in: 1991ACJ695
K.L. Issrani, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the award dated 12.3.1987, passed in Claim Case No. 21 of 1986 by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur.2. The appellant had filed a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Act before the Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, claiming Rs. 60,000/- on account of the death of her husband, late Hanuman Prasad Agrawal, due to rash and negligent driving by respondent No. 2, Pritam Singh, who was driver of truck No. MTG 3178. The truck is owned by respondent No. 1, firm. It is insured with respondent No. 3, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Respondent No. 4, Gyarsilal, is the son of late Hanuman Prasad. Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 remained ex parte before the Claims Tribunal.3. Case of the appellant is that her husband Hanuman Prasad was working as Munim with the respondent No. 1. In the intervening night of 31.5.1984 and 1.6.1984 he was crushed by the truck No. MTG 3178, which...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »