Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Administrator of Indore Nagar Palika Nigam Vs. Rannsingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ569; (1999)IIILLJ340MP
Qureshi, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Indore (Labour Court) in Case No. 4/W.C. Act/78-Fatal.2. The acts leading to this appeal, in short are that one Rannsingh and Bhura, wife of Rannsingh, had filed an application under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act before the lower Court claiming compensation of Rs. 13,500/- on the ground that the Municipal Corporation, Indore owns the Nehru stadium and the land adjacent to the stadium. On the land adjacent to the stadium the Corporation decided to construct a badminton hall, the construction of which started in the month of April, 1977. The contract for the construction of the aforesaid hall was given to respondent Nos. 3 and 4. That one Suratiya was employed as a labourer by the contractors and while working as such labourer he fell down from the scaffolding due to which he received injuries to which he succumbed. The monthly income of the deceas...
Janpad Panchayat Vs. Shashikala Wd/O Sunil Kumar Vatsa and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ249
ORDERR.C. Lahoti, J.1. The revision is directed against the order rejecting an application under Order 9, Rule 7, Civil Procedure Code preferred by alleged owner of the vehicle in claim proceedings before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.2. The cause for absence assigned by the petitioner in its application has been found by the Tribunal to be prima facie unsustainable from the record. The application states that defendant No. 1 was sick without stating the name of the disease and the period of sickness. Moreover, defendant No. 1 was an institution, namely Janpad Panchayat, who could not have fallen sick. The affidavit of one V. K. Parashar, Cooperative Extension Officer filed in support of the application, states that the Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat was sick. But, no reason has been assigned as to why the affidavit of the Chief Executive Officer himself was not filed. The finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal is well reasoned and based on material and hence not open t...
Beta Naphthol Limited Vs. Cegat
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-1991
Reported in: 1992(38)ECC258; 1996(83)ELT36(MP)
ORDERV.S. Kokje, J.1. In this petition, the petitioners have challenged an order of the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Special Bench) (for short 'the CEGAT') imposing condition of deposit of Rs. 7 lakh 89 thousand (7,89000/-) for grant of stay against recovery.2. A show cause notice was issued in this petition to the respondents and Shri B.G. Neema, the learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India, appears on behalf of the respondents. Shri A.M. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in exercise of its jurisdiction to waive pre-deposit or not, the CEGAT has to act judiciously and cannot act arbitrarily. According to Shri Mathur the order of the CEGAT is completely arbitrary and betrays non-application of mind to the relevant circumstances of the case. Shri Neema refutes these submissions and submits that the normal procedure is to file an appeal before the CEGAT after depositing the amount demanded, which is under challenge.3. It is a discretio...
Administrator of Indore Nagar Palika Vs. Rannsingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-1991
Reported in: I(1993)ACC287
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Indore (Labour Court) in Case No. 4/W.C.Act/78-Fatal.2. The facts leading to this appeal, in short, are that one Rannsingh and Bhura, wife of Rannsingh, had filed an application under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act before the lower Court claiming compensation of Rs. 13,500/- on the ground that the Municipal Corporation, Indore owns the Nehru Stadium and the land adjacent to that stadium. On the land adjacent to the stadium the Corporation decided to construct a badminton hall, the construction of which started in the month of April, 1977. The contract for the construction of the aforesaid hall was given to respondent Nos. 3 and 4. That one Suratiya was employed as a labourer by the contractors and while working as such labourer he fell down from the scaffolding due to which he received injuries to which he succumbed. The monthly income of the...
Kanji and ors. Vs. Udiya and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1991
Reported in: AIR1991MP354; 1992(0)MPLJ632
S.D. Zha, J.1. This second appeal by contesting defendants Kanji S/o Pirag, Sukhdeo S/o Kanji and Manubai Wd/o Pirag, defendants Nos. 1, 3 and 4, was by order dated 1-7-1981 admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the court below erred in holding that the suit was not barred by limitation?(2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the lower court erred in decreeing the suit even when it found that the suit was barred by limitation against Manubai(3) Whether the lower court has erred in granting a relief in excess of that claimed by the plaintiff?2. Plaintiff Udiya originally filed suit against defendants Kanji, Jagdish, now respondent No. 2, and Sukhdeo claiming declaration that he had easementary right of way for himself, his labourers, his bullock cart and cattle over Khasra Nos. 184, 185 and 186 at village Bhogdad for access to his Bhumi-swami lands Khasra Nos. 166/2, 167, 174, and 169 at village Bhog...
M.P. Electricity Board, Rajgarh (Bisora) M.P. Vs. Rukminibai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1991
Reported in: AIR1992MP50; 1992(0)MPLJ434
ORDERA.G. Qureshi, J. 1. The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board has filed this revision petition under Section 115, CPC, being aggrieved by the Order dated 28-9-89 passed by the Additional Judge to the court of District Judge, Rajgarh in M.J.C. No. 8 of 1987, rejecting the application of the applicant under Order 1, Rule 10, CPC. 2. The brief facts leading to this revision are that certain lands were acquired by the State of M.P. for the benefit of the present applicant M.P. Electricity Board for construction of 132-K.V. Sub-station. An award was passed by the Land acquisition officer allowing compensation for the land acquired at Rs. 37,776/-. The non-applicants Nos. 1 and 2 filed an application before the collector Land acquisition for making a reference for enhancement of the award claiming a sum of Rs. 23,00,000/- as compensation. Thereupon the reference was made by the Collector Land Acquisition to the court of District Judge, Rajgarh. Thereafter on 27-2-1989 an application under O....
B.S. Yadava Vs. Prabhudayal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ304
K.M. Pandey, J.1. This second appeal has come up before this Court against the judgment and decree dated 19-3-1976 passed by Shri Ravi Varma, Additional District Judge, Shivpuri in Civil Appeal No. 12-B of 1974.2. The brief facts are that the respondent filed a suit for damages against the State of Madhya Pradesh and the appellant alleging that he was owner of the disputed land and had constructed 4 flush latrines in the land and an amount of Rs. 4,000/- was spent by him for the said construction. The Tahsildar treating the said construction to be an encroachment started proceedings u/s. 248 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, and the aforesaid constructions were demolished on 29-7-68. The plaintiff's contention was that he was the owner of the property and the constructions could not have been treated as an encroachment on Government land. Besides this, other legal pleas of jurisdiction, limitation, Section 80, C.P.C. were also taken. The learned trial Court dismissed the suit holdi...
Janpad Panchayat and Jila Panchayat Karmachari Sangh and ors. Vs. Stat ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ804
ORDERV.S. Kokje, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Petition No. 1305/87 (Panchayat Karmachari Sangh, M.P. v. The State of M.P. and Ors.).2-3. The petitioner No. 1 in Misc. Petition No. 982 of 87 is a registered Association of employees of Janpad Panchayat and Jila Panchayat of district Ratlam. The other petitioners are or were employees of these Panchayats. The petitioner No. 1 in Misc. Petition No. 1305/87 is a Trade Union named Panchayat Karmachari Sangh, M. P. duly registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, it is represented by its President and office bearers. In both these petitions a declaration that the employees of the Janpad Panchayat and Jila Panchayat are Government servants has been sought and a direction has been sought that they be treated as Government servants and be paid all the benefits, which are available to a Government servant. A grievance of discrimination has been made on the ground that some of the employees of Janpad Panchayat and Jila ...
Umesh Singh S/O Karansingh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and or ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1991
Reported in: 1991(0)MPLJ947
ORDERK.K. Varma, J.1. This is petition purporting to be under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, addressed to this Court, for the quashing of the order dated 20-6-1991 (Annexure P/7) passed by the Collector (Scheduled Tribes Welfare Section), Morena, terminating the services of the petitioner with immediate effect.2. The circumstances for filing the petition in this Court have been stated at page 8 of the petition in Ground (G) in the following terms : -'That, petitioners have no other efficacious remedy than approaching this Hon'ble Court. Presently, there is no Bench of S.A.T. in Gwalior and no building has been allotted for the Bench of State Administrative Tribunal at Gwalior. This petition cannot approach the Tribunal at Jabalpur.'3. In the application for an ad interim writ (I. A. No. 1/91) it was stated at paragraph 4 :- 'that there is no Bench of the M. P. State Administrative Tribunal at Gwalior. The Government has not allotted any building to the M. P. Administrative T...
Hinda and anr. Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1630
S.K. Dubey, J.1. The two appellants, Hinda and Raddha, aggrieved of the judgment passed in S.T. No. 8 of 1986, decided on 29-2-1988, by Additional Sessions Judge, Ashoknagar, District Guna, whereby each of them was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, and Section 324 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, and respectively sentenced to imprisonment for life and two years' rigorous imprisonment-bott sentences to run concurrently-have preferred this appeal from jail.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on the morning of 16th March 1985 at about 6.00 a.m. in village Churali, Bhaniabai, the wife of deceased Nandu, was returning to her home after answering the call of nature; on the way accused Hinda caught her hand; on this she threatened him to beat with Chappal. Hinda hid himself near a tree. By this time deceased Nandu came and asked Hinda why did he catch the hand of Dhaniabai (P.W. 1). On it Hinda inflicted a blow with a 'pharsa' on the neck of Nandu. Daulatia (P.W. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›