Madhya Pradesh Court July 1991 Judgments
Gobarilal Ganeshram Rathore Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ301
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. The two Courts below have passed a decree for ejectment of the tenant/appellant from the suit accommodation, non-residential one (a shop), on the ground available under Section 12(l)(a) of M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961.2. On 14-7-1978 this Court admitted the appeal for hearing parties on the following substantial question of law : -'Whether due to failure of the trial Court in provisionally deciding the dispute about the amount of arrears of rent due to the operation of provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act remained arrested and as such the Courts below were not justified in decreeing the claim of eviction under Section 12(1 )(a) of the Act on the ground of non-compliance of the provisions of Section 13(1) of the Act.'3.During the course of hearing, it was pointed out to the learned counsel for the appellant that the question framed by this Court did not arise for a decision in the appeal in view of the provisions c...
Tag this Judgment!Anndibai and ors. Vs. Geeta Devi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ1120
R.K. Verma, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants, legal representatives of the deceased Kundan Lal Verma, against the award dated 6.5.1982 made by the Illrd Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 45 of 1981, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 12,500/- in respect of the death of Kundan Lal Verma by motor accident.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows:On 23.12.1980 at about 1.00 p.m. while the respondent No. 2 was driving the offending truck-tanker in Snehlataganj, Indore, there was a collision between the truck-tanker and the cyclist Kundan Lal who was run over by the truck-tanker died on the spot. 3. On a claim petition having been filed by the claimants against the owner, driver and the insurer in respect of the truck-tanker in question, the learned Tribunal by the impugned award awarded Rs. 12,500/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the c...
Tag this Judgment!Jagannath and ors. Vs. Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: AIR1992MP133; [1994]80CompCas498(MP)
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the orderdated 14-12-94 (sic) passed by First Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Dewas, in Civil Suit No. 1/1982-B.2. The facts of the case in short are that the non-applicant, Bank of India, Branch Dewas advanced a loan to the applicant on the basis of mortgage of agricultural land. The non-applicant brought a suit for recovery of loan by sale of agricultural land mortgaged with it. The applicant raised an objection that in view of the legal amendment in the State of M.P. Civil Procedure Code, the State of M.P. is a necessary party in a suit pertaining to agricultural land and therefore, the suit cannot proceed without making the State of M .P. a party in the case. The aforesaid objection was disallov, :d by the Court and therefore, the defendants have filed this revision petition.3. According to Shri Amarsingh, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendants, the lower court while passing the impugned order, ha...
Tag this Judgment!islam Bi Vs. Nawab Khan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: I(1992)DMC270
S.D. Jha, J.1. By this petition the petitioner/wife challenges order dated 26.8 1986 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Depalpur dismissing petitioner's claim for maintenance from respondent/husband.2. Petitioner wife presented application for maintenance @ 500/- per month from respondent/husband, in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Depalpur. Petitioner's case briefly stated was that she was married to respondent at Depalpur according to Mohammedan rites some four years before the date of presentation of the claim application. After marriage petitioner and respondent lived together for some time. The petitioner alleged cruelty and desertion also against the respondent but they are now not material for disposal of the present revision petition. The petitioner alleged that respondent drove her away from the house and since then she has been living with her parents. The respondent had married a second time. He is engaged in the work of welding and makes good income ...
Tag this Judgment!Chisalal (deceased by L.R's) Vs. Nihalsingh and Ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: II(1991)ACC358; 1992ACJ181; AIR1992MP74; 1993(0)MPLJ798
R.K. Varma, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimant against the award dated 12-7-1982 made by the Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunals, Indore in Claim Case No. 214/79, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 27,300/- to the claimant in respect of his injuries with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows:--On 22-9-79 while the claimant Ghisalal was going on his cycle from Depalpur to his village Khajariya, he was hit and run over by the truck bearing Registration No. MPE 1405 belonging to respondent No. 3 Kailash-chandra. The truck had passed over the right leg of the claimant causing grievous injuries and the claimant's leg had to be emputated below the knee.3. The claimant filed the instant claim petition on 27-11-1979 joining as non-applicants the driver of the offending truck Nihalsingh and the Insurance Company with which the ...
Tag this Judgment!indore Bhed-bakra Vikreta Sangh and ors. Vs. the Municipal Corporation ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: AIR1992MP134; 1992(0)MPLJ781
ORDER1. The following order of the Court was delivered by V.S. Kokje, J. 2. The petitioners have challenged in this petition the right of the Municipal Corporation to auction the right to recover tax/fee from the dealers engaged in sale and purchase of cattle. The petitioners have also contended that the Municipal Corporation has no authority to impose a tax on sale or purchase of cattle and the levy is totally without authority of law. However, the relief claimed in the petition is issue of appropriate writ or direction quashing the tender notice Annexure-A, whereby respondent No. 3 was authorised to collect the tax from the purchasers of cattle in the Gafoor-Khan Ki Bazaria, Indore. The relief for declaration as to levy of the tax or fee to be unconstitutional has not been sought. In view of this, we will confine our order to the first point alone that is whether the respondent Municipal Corporation can auction the right to collect tax from the purchasers of cattle in the market of G...
Tag this Judgment!Chiranjilal Vs. Central Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: [1994]80CompCas573(MP)
A.G. Qureshi, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated August 23, 1989, passed by the Eighth Additional Judge in the court of the District Judge, Indore, in C. S. No. 3 of 1989 whereby the lower court has directed the present applicant to produce the truck before the court for attachment and sale.2. The facts leading to this revision petition, in short, are that the non-applicant, the Central Bank of India, filed a suit for recovery of loan against the applicant and his guarantor. Along with the suit the non-applicant also filed an application under Order 39, Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code, for interim sale of truck No. CPO 7868 on the ground that the truck was hypothecated with the bank. The present applicant denied the fact of the pledge of the truck with the bank, but the trial court was satisfied that the truck was pledged with the bank and hence passed the impugned order. Hence, this revision petition.3. On a perusal of the order impugned I find that th...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Sharma Vs. M.P. State Textile Corporation Ltd. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ70MP; 1992(0)MPLJ871
V.S. Kokje, J.1. The petitioner was an employee of the M.P. Textile Corporation Ltd. which undoubtedly is an instrumentality of the State and, therefore, covered under the definition of 'State' under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. A departmental enquiry was instituted against the petitioner on certain charges of misconduct. On October 22, 1988 the petitioner was placed under suspension and on October 22, 1988 itself one Shri B.K. Mathur was appointed as enquiry officer. On November 26, 1988 a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner, alleging commission of certain misconducts. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice on December 12, 1988. But prior to that on December 9, 1988 the order for conducting an enquiry and appointment of enquiry officer was cancelled. On December 2, 1988 and December 7, 1988 the petitioner requested for a regular enquiry against him. On December 7, 1988 itself, the petitioner received from Respondent No.2 letter dated December 5, 1988 as...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwar Prasad Kishan Shrivastava Vs. Rakesh Hariram Shrivastava
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ390
R.D. Shukla, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 8-2-1983 of the Additional District Judge, Sagar, passed in Civil Appeal No. 45-A/1982 (arising out of the judgment and decree dated 6-2-1979 of Additional Civil Judge Class II, Sagar passed in Civil Suit No. 12-A/1978) whereby the decree for specific performance of the contract of sale of l/3rd share of defendant's house has been confirmed.2. Brief history of the case is that the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit before the Trial Court on 5-1-1978 with the assertion that the defendant (appellant herein) executed an agreement of sale of l/3rd of his share in the ancestral house on 25-2-1968 and received consideration of Rs. 3,000/- in lieu thereof. Despite notice and requests from the plaintiff, defendant refused to execute the sale deed and further refused to get the same registered.3. Defendant denied the claim of the plaintiff and pleaded that he is owner of the suit property, house No. 252, Lajpatpur, S...
Tag this Judgment!Sudarshan Kumar Dhall Vs. Canara Bank
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ914
ORDERV.S. Kokje, J.1. The petitioner was working as Branch Manager, Laxmi Commercial Bank Limited (for short referred to as 'LCB'). The said Bank was amalgamated with the Canara Bank constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. Prior to the said amalgamation while the petitioner was posted as Manager in LCB at Nagpur, he was placed under suspension by an order dated 24th August, 1984. The petitioner had challenged this suspension in M. P. No. 637/85, filed before this Court. During the pendency of that petition the LCB was amalgamated with the Canara Bank on 24th August, 1985. The respondent/Bank informed the petitioner vide letter dated 24-8-1985 (Annexure C to the petition) that in terms of the scheme for amalgamation approved by the Central Government the petitioner had ceased to be an employee of the LCB w.e.f. the commencement of the business on 24-8-1985 and consequently was not an employee of the respondent/Canara Bank. In view of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »