Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Madhosingh Vs. Ratansingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1993
Reported in: 1993(0)MPLJ755
ORDERS.K. Chawla, J. 1. This is a revision petition by a private party challenging bail order of Additional Sessions Judge granting bail in a murder case.2. On 23-8-1992, at about 11-05 a.m. one Madho Singh lodged a report at Panihar Police Station in Gwalior district that on that date at about 7-00 a.m., in village Piproli, his elder brother deceased Sobran Singh was grazing cattle, when six persons came armed with weapons to assault him. These six persons were Ramnath Singh, Ratan Singh and Mitta Singh, who were armed with Pharsas, Bhattu Singh armed with a lathi and Amar Singh and Vishal Singh armed with guns. Seeing them approaching, both informant Madho Singh as also deceased Sobran Singh started to flee. But Sobran Singh could not run away and was overtaken by the assailants. Ramnath Singh then threw down Sobran Singh and started to beat him with lathi and Pharsa. Amar Singh and Vishal Singh fired at informant Madho Singh but the shots missed him. Continuing with his report, info...
Dhar Cement Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of M.P. Thr. Secretary, Ministry o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1993
Reported in: AIR1993MP251
ORDER1. This order shall dispose of Misc. Petition No. 1770 of 1992 as also Misc. Petition No. 1852 of 1992 between the'same parties as they raise substantially the same question namely a rational nexus between the quantity of cement required to be obtained by the impugned tenders and the condition of production capacity imposed in the tenders.2. The petitioner is a limited company registered with the Registrar of companies and is employed in manufacture of ordinary Portland cement with most modern technology with dry process suspension preheater with rotary kiln technology by which process more than 95% of cement is produced in our country and in the world. The petitioner contends that the cement produced by it conforms to the standard prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards under IS-269/ 1976 of which a copy of current certificate issued by the Bureau is Annexure P-l. The petitioner contends that it is supplying cement to various Government, department including the present resp...
Vostok Laboratories Vs. the Controller, Food and Drug Administration
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3693
ORDERA.R. Tiwari, J.1. This petition is directed against the registration of the Criminal Case No. 4779/1989 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore as regards some of the partners, arranged as accused Nos. 4 to 8 in the complaint, Under Section 27A and 27D of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner-firm is engaged in the business of formulation of different varieties of Drugs under the License No. 25/158/73 issued by the Controller of Food & Drugs, Bhopal. It is thus a drug manufacturer. Oxyphenbutozone tablets IP is one of their products. The partner Jaikumar is said to be the person in charge of the activities and thus, responsible for all acts and omissions of the petitioner-firm. The sample of this drug manufactured by the petitioner-firm was drawn on 24-1-86 from M/s. Modi Medicals, Bhilwada (Rajasthan). The report dated 29-8-86 evidenced this as sub-standard. It was thus opined as adulterated. After completion ...
Somatsingh and ors. Vs. Lella Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1993
Reported in: AIR1993MP253
S.K. Dubey, J. 1. This second appeal is by the plaintiffs aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate Court, whereby the suit of the plaintiffs for declaration and possession decreed by the trial Court has been dismissed. 2. The appeal was admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law :--'(1) Whether it would be legal for the first appellate Court to brush aside the findings of the trial Court without giving adequate reasons for rejecting them ? (2) Whether without a specific plea by the defendant that he was paying lagan to Bhaiyalal, the evidence of payment of such rent could be permitted to be adduced in the trial Court ? (3) Whether the lower appellate Court was justified in rejecting the application under Order 41, Rule 27, CPC? 3. Brief facts leading to this appeal are thus : the suit relates to agricultural land situated in village Bothi, Tehsil Kurwai, District Vidisha, bearing survey No. 42, area 4 bighas 14 biswas and survey No. 4...
Neemabai Vs. Gyanbai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1993
Reported in: AIR1993MP194
S.K. Dubey, J. 1. This is a plaintiffs miscellaneous appeal under Order 43, Rule I(u) of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the order dated 11-3-1991 of remand passed by the lower appellate Court in Civil Appeal No. 91 A/88 preferred against the ex parte judgment and decree dated 29-11-75 passed in Civil Suit.No. 22A/74 by Civil Judge Class-I, Vidisha. 2. The material facts leading to this appeal are thus : plaintiff instituted a suit forspecific performance against the respondents No. 1 and 2 on the averments that the father of the respondents No. 1 and 2, Umrao Singh entered into a registered agreement to sell on 13-6-67 in respect of the agricultural suit land, but prior to execution of the registered document of same Umrao Singh died, hence, when the respondents did not execute the sale deed, the plaintiff instituted the suit for specific performance. It is stated by the plaintiff that during the pendency of the suit, he was dispossessed, hence the relief of restoration of posses...
Mahesh Bhargawa Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1993
Reported in: (1994)ILLJ1113MP; 1993(0)MPLJ586
ORDERS.K. Chawla, J.1. An order of termination of service of a clerk is under challenge in this writ petition.2. The petitioner Mahesh Bhargawa was given appointment as a casual clerk by M.P. Vidhik Sahayata Tatha Vidhik Salah Board (M.P. Legal Aid and Legal Advice Board, hereafter referred to as 'Board') for 89 days by order dated December 16, 1988 (Annexure P-1). He was posted to work in the Office of Tehsil Legal Aid and Advice Committee. Sheopurkalan in Morena District. He contined to work as Clerk even after the expiry of 89 days stipulated in the appointment order. Ultimately by order dated December 8, 1989 (Annexure P-2), said to have been served on the petitioner on December 22, 1989, his services were terminated with immediate effect. It is that order which is under challenge in this writ petition.3. The challenge was made on different grounds mentioned in the writ petition, but the only ground canvassed before us was that activities of the Board are 'industry' within the mean...
Sushil Kumar Vs. Indo Tibetan Border Police Force and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1993
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ264MP; 1993(0)MPLJ419
ORDERT.N. Singh, J. 1. This order shall govern disposal of M.P. Nos. 1466 and 1467, both of 1989. Both petitioners have a common grievance and indeed, respondents have raised a common plea in the instant petitions claiming that they are not entitled to any relief from this Court on the basis of a single legal contention raised in returns filed in both petitions which is forcefully and very competently pressed by Shri Mittal. 2. Petitioner Sushil Kumar of M.P. No. 1466 of 1989 was appointed under Order, Annexure P/l, dated October 26, 1988 on being selected in the test conducted for that purpose, in the post of Constable/Lineman. The other petitioner Virendra Singh of M.P. No. 1467 of 1989, it is not disputed, was appointed as a Naik/Radio Operator, vide order dated April 23, 1988. It is also not disputed that services of both petitioners under orders of appointment are to be governed by the provisions of Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949, for short, the 'Act' and the Rules framed ...
Air Transport Co. (Regd.) Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1993
Reported in: [1994]207ITR487(MP)
1. Heard Shri Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission.2. By this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated January 29, 1993, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, dismissing the petitioner's application for stay and even while dismissing the application directed the appeal to be heard in April, 1993.3. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has approached this court praying for direction that the Tribunal should consider the petitioner's application afresh and pass appropriate orders staying recovery of the enforcement of demand till the disposal of the matter by the Tribunal.4. Strong reliance has been placed by learned counsel on a decision as reported in [1971] ITR 851 (ITO v. M.K. Mohammad Kunhi [1969] 71 ITR 815 ). It was on the basis of this judgment that it was contended that when the matter is almost covered by the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court which was brought to ...
Mukesh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1993
Reported in: 1994(0)MPLJ406
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. Shri V.K. Dubey, learned consel for the applicants.He is heard on the question of admission.Admit. Issue notice. P. F. today.At this stage, Shri G. Desai, learned Dy. Government Advocate appears and takes notice on behalf of the State. As such, issuance of notice became unnecessary.2. The point is short. Hence, on request, the parties are heard finally.3. The applicants and one Mukesh are being tried for offences punishable under Sections 324/506, Indian Penal Code in Criminal Case No. 518/92 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anjad. They were admitted to bail.4. It emerges from the copy of the proceedings, filed as Annexure 'A' with this petition, that the applicants and Mukesh absented themselves on 19-1-1993 and as such, bail bonds were forfeited and warrants of arrests were directed to be issued, fixing next date as 28-4-1993. It is pertinent to note that no process was directed to be issued against the surety and no direction was issued to re...
Sohanlal Vs. Dindayal Chaudhari
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1993
Reported in: AIR1994MP89; 1993(0)MPLJ330
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. The tenant/defendant has come up in second appeal feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court directing a suit for ejectment on the ground of genuine requirement of the plaintiff/respondent to be decreed under Section 12(1)(f) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961.2. Vide order dated 10-2-1993, this Court admitted the appeal for hearing parties on the following substantial question, of law:--'Whether the lower appellate Court committed a jurisdictional error in decreeing the suit under Section 12(1)(f) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, upholding the requirement of the plaintiff's brother's son, which cannot be a ground for ejectment under the provisions abovesaid?'3. The facts, in so far as relevant for answering the question on which the appeal has been heard, may briefly be noticed. The suit was filed by late Dindayal, as sole plaintiff, who having expired during the pendency of this second appeal, his legal representa...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »