Madhya Pradesh Court September 1991 Judgments
Vishnunarayan Badrinarayan Vs. Anantnarayan Motilal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ544
S.D. Jha, J.1. This Second Appeal by the plaintiff, who was unsuccessful in two Courts below, was by order dated 14-9-1979 admitted for final hearing on the following substantial question of Jaw : -'Whether title to agricultural land could be acquired by adverse possession'?2. At the time of final hearing the appellant was granted leave to urge the following additional grounds : -1. Whether the lower Court is right in holding in the facts and circumstances of the case, that the possession of Motilal became adverse to Kanhaiyalal?2. Whether the lower Court is right in holding that Motilal acquired title to the land in suit by adverse possession?3. Facts material for decision of the appeal are that one Shaligram had 5 sons. This appeal is concerned with three : Badrinaryan whose son is the present plaintiff Vishnunarayan, Kanhaiyalal and Motilal. Kanhaiyalal died in the year 1965 leaving behind his widow Sitabai as his sole heir, who died on 23-9-1966. Sitabai before her death executed r...
Tag this Judgment!Gulabchand JaIn and ors. Vs. Khushal Chand and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1991
Reported in: AIR1992MP264; 1994(0)MPLJ207
ORDERShacheendra Dwivedi, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred by the defendants, aggrieved by the order of refusal to the cross-examination ofthe respondent-plaintiff No. 1, on the affidavit filed by him in support of his application under p. 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code').2. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for partition of the immovable property of undivided Hindu Family, wherein an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 was also filed, restraining the defendants from alienating the family properties.3. The defendants-prrtitioners filed an application under Order 19, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C., submitting therein that the cross-examination of deponent was necessary, as an affidavit was filed by the plaintiff-respondent, No. 1 Khushatchand, in the ceiling proceedings, wherein he stated that he is the sole owner of the land in village Perkhedi, though that land is also included in the suit properties.4. The learned trial Court rejected t...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kaloo and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1991
Reported in: [1993]76CompCas267(MP)
R.K. Verma, J. 1. In the light of the view taken by this court in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 261 of 1989 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shabirkhan) decided on September 16, 1991 [1993] 76 Comp Cas 100 (MP), governing disposal of a bunch of similar appeals, this appeal against the order of interim compensation awarded under Section 92A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), does not merit admission.2. This order shall also govern the disposal of M. A. No. 124 of 1990 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sowla ), M. A. No. 125 of 1990 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Naharsingh), M. A. No. 126 of 1990 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kekdiya), M. A. No. 127 of 1990 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Bhrula), M. A. No. 128 of 1990 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Navalsingh ), M. A. No. 129 of 1990 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Laloo) and M. A. No. 130 of 1990 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Bhuwansingh).3. This appeal as also the connected appeals Nos. 124 to 130 o...
Tag this Judgment!Sajjan Singh and ors. Vs. State of M.P. Through Collector Jhabua and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1991
Reported in: II(1992)ACC225
R.K. Verma, J. 1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.A. No. 223/85 Pradeep Kumar v. State and Anr. M. A.No. 225/85 (Maganlal v. State and Anr.) and M.A. No. 226/85 (Kuber Singh v. State and Anr.) which arise out of the same award made in Claim cases No. 19/84/47/84 and 20/84 respectively.2. This is an appeal filed by the claimants Sajjan Singh and his wife Smt. Paribai against the Award dated 16.5.85 made in Claim Case No. 18/84 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhabua whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation on 'no fault' principle under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, as amended in 1982 in respect of the death of their son, deceased Babusingh in Motor accident which took place in the mid-night intervening 8th and 9th March, 1984,3. The facts giving rise to this appeal and the other connected appeals are as follows:-The deceased Babusingh S/o claimant Sajjansingh the injured Pradeepkumar S/o Pannalal, the deceased Dhannala...
Tag this Judgment!Surinder Singh S/O Niranjan Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ245
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The only point involved in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which is filed by a member of the Indian Army, is whether he having once been convicted and sentenced on 'plea of guilty' in a summary court-martial held under the provisions of the Army Act and the Rules, be retried in General Court-Martial for the same offences.2. The question arises on the following facts:In a summary court-martial held on 17-12-1990 (Annexure-P/1) the petitioner, who is a Havaldar, pleaded guilty to the charge of sodomy under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, for other charges under Section 46(a) and Section 39(a) of the Army Act (shortly referred to as the Act). The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment apart from his reduction to ranks and dismissal from service. By a warrant (Annex. P/2) issued on 17-12-1990 he was sent to civil prison to suffer the sentence of imprisonment.3. In accordance with the provi...
Tag this Judgment!Lachchandei W/O Sonu Halba Vs. Sobharam Dashrath and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-1991
Reported in: I(1992)ACC488; 1992(0)MPLJ432
ORDERK.L. Issrani, J.1. The present appeal is under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, against the Award dated 20-12-1982, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur, in Claim Case No. 15/81.2. On 1-1-1981, at about 12.00 noon, the deceased Dinesh Halba, a boy aged about 5 years was severely injured in an accident caused by truck No. M.P.R. 3150 when he was playing on the pile of concrete at the side of the road. The truck was driven rashly and negligently by the respondent No. 1. The truck is owned by the respondent No. 2 and the respondent No. 3 is the insurer of the said truck. Consequent to the injuries received by the boy Dinesh, he died in the Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur, on the next day.3. The defence of the respondents was that Dinesh met with death on account of his own negligence.4. The Claims Tribunal held that the driver was rash and negligent in driving the truck but awarded only Rs. 4000/- as compensation + Rs. 1000/- towards funeral ex...
Tag this Judgment!Surinder Singh Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1312
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The only point involved in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which is filed by a member of the Indian Army, is whether he having once been convicted and sentenced on 'plea of guilty' in a summary Court-martial held under the provisions of the Army Act and the Rules, be retried in General Court-martial for the same offences.2-3. The question arises on the following facts:In a summary Court-martial held on 17-12-90 (Annexure P-1) the petitioner, who is a Havaldar, pleaded guilty to the charge of sodomy under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, for other charges under Section 46(a) and Section 38(a) of the Army Act (shortly referred to as the Act). The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment apart from his reduction to rank and dismissal from service. By a warrant (Annexure P-2) issued on 17-12-1990 he was sent to civil prison to suffer the sentence of imprisonment.4. In accordance with the provision...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-1991
Reported in: II(1992)DMC486
V. Bhardwaj, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the convict appellant against his conviction Under Section 304B I.P.C. and the sentence of 7 year's R.I. imposed on him by the VIIIth Addl. Sessions Judge, Indore.2. The prosecution case is that on 11.8.87 one Ashok Kumar S/oSunderlal filed a F.I.R. that deceased Ushabai W/o Rameshwar had died because of burn injuries suffered by her. On investigation it was found thatUshabai was married to Rameshwar 3 years prior to the incident. Her husbandwas not treating her well and was demanding money for purchase of Luna byway of dowry. A case of dowry death was, therefore, registered and afterfurther investigation the accused/appellant Rameshwar was prosecuted on acharge Under Section 304B I.P.C. On trial the accused/appellant was convicted andsentenced as mentioned above.3. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence the appellant has filedthis appeal.4. Shri J.P. Gupta, Senior Advocate appearing for the appellantsubmitted that the conviction is not ba...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv NaraIn Ratanlal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ285
ORDERK.K. Verma, J.1. They are heard.2. Crime No. 78/1991 was registered against the applicant at Vijaypur Police Station under Sections 323 and 324, Indian Penal Code. On the medical report, Section 325, Indian Penal Code was added. The applicant was arrested and was released on bail on 11th August 1991. On 17th August 1991, the charge-sheet was filed and Section 326, Indian Penal Code was added to the offences in the charge-sheet. The Police do not show in their report (filed today) that they are seeking the arrest of the applicant.3. The applicant's learned counsel says that he has no information what order, if any, has so far been passed by the learned Magistrate about the steps to be taken for securing the attendance of the applicant before that Court.4. In Rambabu Sharma v. State of M. P., 1990 (I) MPWN Note 79 (Misc. Cri. Case No. 866/1989 (G), decided on 16-8-1989), it was held that the right of the police to rearrest on their own, an accused, who was already admitted to bail, ...
Tag this Judgment!Hariram Phulsingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1991
Reported in: 1992(0)MPLJ813
ORDERT.N. Singh, J.1. For selling adulterated goat-milk the petitioner suffered conviction under Section 7(1) read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, for short, the 'Act', and a sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment besides fine of Rs. 1,000/-. He appealed unsuccessfully and is now in this Court challenging the verdict in this revision.2. Prosecution's case, shortly put, is that on 20-10-1983, at about 7.00 a.m., the petitioner was found carrying on a bicycle in a can, about 8 litres of goat-milk which he had brought for sale in Guna town. He was accosted by the Food Inspector, P.W.I at Choudhari Mohalla near Jain temple in Guna town and sample was taken of the milk in presence of witnesses, P.W.2, Bhanupratapsingh and P.W.3, Shivram. A Panchanama was prepared, proved as Ex.P/6, but other contemporaneous documents executed and proved as Exs.P/4 and P/5 are the statutory notices contemplated under form VI and the receipt of the sale-price paid...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »