Madhya Pradesh Court November 1993 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.
Sunita Mishra Vs. Sanjay Kumar Mishra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC14
C.C. Gupta., J.1. With the consent of the parties, the revision itself is heard and decided finally by this order.2. Non-applicant husband has filed a suit at Bilaspur seeking declaration Under Section 12(1)(d) of the Hindu Marriage Act, to the effect that the marriage between them was a nullity. The applicant-wife filed an application praying maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/~ per month together with Rs. 1000/- as expense. The learned Judge, taking into consideration of facts and circumstances as available, granted Rs. 400/- per month as maintenance and Rs. 800/- as litigation expenses. It is this order which is impugned in the present civil revision.3. From the documents filed by the parties, it appears that the applicant had in her application dated 1.12.92 claimed Rs. 500/- per month so maintenance and Rs. 1000/- as litigation expenses. It however appears that she filed yet another application on 11.1.93 and claimed expenses amount of Rs. 2,000/- on the ground that she has to inc...
Mewalal Kanhaiyalal Vs. Jankibai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-02-1993
Reported in: 1994(0)MPLJ369
M.V. Tamaskar, J.1. This is plaintiff/appellant's second appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Addl. District Judge, West Nimar, Khargone, in C.A. No. 11-A/76, against the Judgment and decree passed by Civil Judge, Class I, Khargone in C. A. No. 17-A/71, setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and allowing the appeal vide paras 38 to 42 of the judgment.2. The original holder of the suit property i.e. agricultural land and house as described in para 1 of the plaint was one Kanaksingh, who was Bhilala belonging to an aboriginal tribe. He died in 1968 leaving Birjubai, his second wife, as well as plaintiff, who is grand daughter of Kanaksingh, being daughter of Sitabai (from another wife Laxmibai). The genealogy is as under :--Kanaksingh (died 1968)|--------------------------------------| | Laxmibai Birjubai (died on 28-8-1968)||Jankibai (Plaintiff)3. The suit was also filed for possession and mesne profits for the years 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71 at ...
Vishnoo Kumar Budhan and ors. Vs. Liladhar Hari Ram Agarwal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-02-1993
Reported in: 1994ACJ727; 1994(0)MPLJ511
ORDERP.P. Naolekar, J.1. This order shall also govern disposal of M.C.C. No. 4/93, Vinod Kumar v. Liladhar and Ors., M.C.C. No. 5/93, Smt. Gayatri Devi v. Liladhar and M.C.C. No. 6/93, Kapoor Chand v. Liladhar. The question involved in these petitions is of general public importance and is of every day occurrence, and therefore, I requested Shri Deepak Verma and Shri Ravindra Shrivastava, Advocates, to appear as Amicus Curiae. I must record my thanks for their able assistance to this Court at a short notice in spite of their pre-occupation and responsibilities. The question is whether the High Court has power and jurisdiction to transfer a case from Jabalpur Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to Bilaspur Motor Accident Claims Tribunal constituted by the State Government for a particular area by notification issued under Section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, exercising powers under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. Arguments of the Counsel were spread over on three aspect...
Govind Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-01-1993
Reported in: 1996CriLJ305
R.P. Awasthy, J.1. Having been convicted, by Shri D.N. Joshi, Second A.J. to S.J. Sagar, camp at Rehli for alleged commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and having been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, the present appellants have filed this appeal.2. Prosecution case is that previously the pesent accused were keeping their grocery shop of a raised platform belonging to Municipal Committee, Deori. The Municipal Committee had dismanled the said raised platform for making some other construction. Therefore, the accused placed their shop only from two or three days before the incident dated 13-3-85 in front the shop of Kapoor Chand (since deceased). The residents and shopkeepers of the vicinity felt aggrieved on account of accused keeping their shop at the said place on the ground that the said shop had blocked their passage. Therefore, when on 13-3-85 at about 3 to 3.30 p.m. the accused were digging holes in the ground placing some shade on their shop, Ka...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›