Madhya Pradesh Court December 1992 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.
State of M.P. Vs. Ashok and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1992
Reported in: I(1993)DMC243
S.D. Jha, J.1. The appellant-State of M.P. through this appeal against acquittal, challenges judgment dated 29-2-88 delivered by II Additional Sessions Judge Dewas in Sections Trial No. 12 of 1985 (State v. Ashok and others) acquitting the respondents accused of charges under Sections 306, 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961.2. Accused Ashok is the son of accused No. 2 Anokhilal and accused No. 3 Sharda is mother of accused Ashok. Accused N01. 4, 5 and 6 namely Giru alias Girjesh, Kiran find Madhu alias Munni are sisters of accused Ashok and daughters of accused No. 2 Anokhilal and No. 3 Ms. Sharda. Prosecution case is that deceased Kamini alias Shobha daughter of Surendrakumer (P.W. 1) was married to accused Ashok, on 20-1-84. la the marriage two gold rings, one small almirahs and some utensils were given. According to the prosecution, accused Ashok and his parents and sisters used to harass Kamini laying that gold rings were less in weight and almirah was small. ...
Motilal Soni and anr. Vs. Issrani Bus Service and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ222
ORDERK.L. Issrani, J.1. The present revision petition is filed against the order dated 5-1-1991, passed by the Claims Tribunal, Hoshangabad, in Execution Case No. 14/78, in which it has been held that the execution of the Award of recovery cannot be made from non-applicant No. 4 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Bhopal, as it was not a party to the original proceedings in which the Award was passed.2. It is admitted position that a claim petition filed by the applicants-claimants, non-applicant No. 4 National Insurance Co. Ltd. was not a party to the proceedings and the non-applicants Nos. 1 to 3 owners and driver were ex parte and an ex parte award of Rs. 21,000/- was passed against the non-applicants Nos. 1 to 3 only on 114-1981. None of the parties challenged this Award.3. It is only in execution application that the applicants-claimants filed an application for recovery of the amount awarded against the Insurance Company. According to the claimants, the bus which caused the accident was...
Chambaram S/O Gangaram Vs. Chanda and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ80
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. The plaintiff has come up in appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial Court dismissing its suit as not maintainable.2. The plaintiff sought for a declaration that recovery of Rs. 53,914/-sought to be made by the defendant/State was illegal and void. The case of the plaintiff was that the impugned amount was assessed as sales-tax payable by the plaintiff on certain transactions entered into by him which, in his submission, did not amount to transactions of sale and hence were beyond the ken of M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The State objected to the maintainability of the suit. A preliminary issue was framed. Having heard the parties, the trial Court has held that the suit of the nature brought by the plaintiff-appellant was barred under Section 37 of M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. Section 37 of the Act reads as under: -- '37. Bar to certain proceedings. -- Save as provided in Section 44, no assessment ord...
Goel Industries and anr. Vs. Om Prakash Mittal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ137
ORDERR.C. Lahoti, J.1. This revision preferred by the defendants challenges admissibility of the instrument dated 12-2-1988, forming basis of the suit, admitted by the trial Court in evidence as promissory note, treating it to be properly stamped.2. The instrument reads as under:^^ge xks;y bUMLVht] eqjSuk ok;nk djrs gSa fdekax ij HkkbZ vkse izdk'k feky] eqjSuk dks vFkok ftls og fnykosa] :i;kvadu ipiu gtkj flQZ muls izkIr /ku ds cnys nsaxs] bl ij C;kt nj 1-50 izfr'krekfld ls izR;sd 180 fnu ckn ns; gksxkAeqjSuk Qkxqu cnh 9] laor 2044] psd ua- ------------------- FOR GOYAL INDUSTRIESfnukad12&2&1988 Sd/-Partner.:i;s55000@& GOYAL INDUSTRIESOLD MILL AREA, DATTPURAMORENA, M.P. [on adhesive stamp of 50paise]'3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the document is not a promissory note, and if a promissory note, then being payable otherwise than on demand, is insufficiently stamped. It is further submitted that in the statement of plaintiff Om Prakash Mittal it was ad...
S.R. Enterprises Vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ178
ORDERK.L. Issrani, J.1. The present revision petition is against the order dated 18-11-1991 passed by the District Judge, Jabalpur in Misc. Judicial Case No. 149/91 refusing to grant injunction in favour of the applicant restraining the non-applicant from encashing the Bank Guarantee amount.2. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant had taken a contract for erection of towers on Indore Nagda 400 KV line from the non-applicant/Board. In terms of the contract, the Board had to prepare the foundation over which the tower was to be erected and supply various members (parts) from designated store where after the applicant was to erect the tower but the Board had given contract for preparation of foundation to other agencies. The Board failed to supply all the members, with the result that the applicant-Firm was prevented from erecting tower within the stipulated period of two months. The Board has illegally rescinded the contract. According to the appli...
Renuka Bai and ors. Vs. Jai Prakash Sethy and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ126
ORDERK.L. Issrani, J. 1. The present revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is against the order dated 15-9-1992 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, in Motor Vehicles Case No. 36 of 1992, refusing to allow the application of the claimant-applicant under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act for interim compensation.2. In this case, the non-applicant No. 3 Rajendra Singh who is the owner of the truck has been ordered to pay interim compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the applicant. But the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the non-applicant No. 2 Insurance Company is also liable to pay, which has been wrongly absolved by the lower Court.3. A show cause notice was issued. Shri Gulab Sohane, learned counsel for the non-applicant No. 2 Oriental Insurance Company appears. None appeared for other non-applicants. It seems that the aggrieved party i.e. the non-applicant No. 3 Rajendra Singh has not filed any revision petiti...
Jitendra Singh Sahi (Lt. Col.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ951
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhkari, J. 1. The petitioner is an Army officer, holding presently the rank of Lt. Col. Under this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, he challenges and seeks quashing of the impugned show cause notice, proposing his termination from service issued on 19-7-1989 (Annexure A 4), by Chief of Army Staff and conveyed by Director General, Discipline and Vigilance (for Adjutant General), in purported exercise of powers under Section 19 of the Army Act, 1950, read with Rule 14 of the Army Rules, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' and 'the Rules').2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the impugned show cause notice, on more than one grounds, but in our opinion the main question regarding competence of the Chief of the Army Staff, to take recourse to the procedure of termination of services under Rule 14 of the Rules, when the Court Martial of the petitioner for the alleged misconduct amounting to offence, was barred by limi...
Motilal and anr. Vs. Issrani Bus Service and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 1993ACJ279
K.L. Issrani, J.1. The present revision petition is filed against the order dated 5.1.1991, passed by the Claims Tribunal, Hoshangabad, in Execution Case No. 14 of 1978 in which it has been held that the execution of the award of recovery cannot be made from non-applicant No. 4, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Bhopal, as it was not a party to the original proceedings in which the award was passed.2. It is admitted position that in claim petition filed by the applicants-claimants, non-applicant No. 4, National Insurance Co. Ltd., was not a party to the proceedings and the non-applicant Nos. 1 to 3, owners and driver, were ex parte and an ex parte award of Rs. 21,000/- was passed against the non-applicant Nos. 1 to 3 only on 11.4.1981. None of the parties challenged this award.3. It is only in execution application that the applicants-claimants filed an application for recovery of the amount awarded against the insurance company. According to the claimants, the bus which caused the accident...
Motilal Vs. Issarani Bus Service and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1992
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC340
K.L. Issarani, J.1. The present revision petition is filed against the order dated 5.1.1991, passed by the Claims Tribunal, Hoshangabad, in Execution, Case No. 14/78, in which it has been held that the execution of the Award of recovery cannot be made from non-applicant No. 4 National Insurance Company Ltd., Bhopal, as it was not a party to the original proceedings in which the Award was passed.2. It is admitted position that a claim petition filed by the applicants-claimants, non-applicant No. 4 National Insurance Company Ltd. was not a party to the proceedings and the non-applicants Nos. 1 to 3 owners and driver were ex-parte and an ex-pane award of Rs. 21,000/- was passed against the non-applicants Nos. 1 to 3 only on 11.4.1981. None of the parties challenged this Award.3. It is only in execution application that the applicants-claimants filed an application for recovery of the amount awarded against the Insurance Company. According to the claimants, the bus which caused the acciden...
Savitri Sharma and ors. Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1992
Reported in: II(1993)ACC141; 1993ACJ714
R.P. Awasthy, J.1. It is a claimant's appeal claiming enhancement of compensation awarded in Claim Case No. 45 of 1983 by award dated 31.7.1989 by Mrs. Sushma Shrivastava, Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur. By virtue of the impugned award the claimant, a housewife aged about twenty-six years at the time of the accident, has been awarded Rs. 12,000/- by way of compensation with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the said amount is paid to the claimant.2. From the testimony given by Dr. Ravi Agarwal, it is fully established that the claimant Savitri Sharma lost vision of her left eye.3. The learned Member of the Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,000/- by way of compensation on the score of the permanent disability incurred by the claimant.4. It has been argued for the claimant that merely because the claimant could not or did not produce any bills or vouchers of purchasing medicines, etc. and the expenditure in...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »