Madhya Pradesh Court January 1994 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.
Meera Bai Vs. Bhujbal Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2376
Tej Shanker, J.1. This reference has been made by Brother Shacheendra Dwivedi, J., relating to the interpretation of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter called 'the Act').2. Facts of the case are not of much significance. However, briefly narrated facts are that a complaint was filed under Sections 323 and 347 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(iv) and (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 before the Special Judge (Sessions Judge, Guna). The question that arose before the learned Sessions Judge was as to whether he had jurisdiction to take cognizance or not. By its order dated 14-3-1992, the learned Sessions Judge (Special Judge) held that the Court had no jurisdiction to take cognizance in view of Section 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the complaint was dismissed. Against this order, an appeal was preferred under Section 378(4) of the Criminal P...
Har Charan Singh Vs. Smt. Turza Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ423; AIR1994MP99; 1994(0)MPLJ771
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The deceased Devaji Kubbi lost his life in a truck accident on the night intervening 28th and 29th June, 1980. He was employed on the truck as one of the labourers for loading and unloading of goods In the claim petition filed by his dependents,the appellant was pleaded as owner of truck No. CPR 9128 which was involved in the accident. The driver of the truck was one Nago, who was also made a party (respondent No. 5) in this appeal, but he remained ex parte. The respondent No. 6 -- The New India Insurance Company, with whom the truck was alleged, to have been insured was not made party in the claim petition before the Tribunal. At the fag end of the trial of the case, the claimants filed an application under Order 1, Rule 10, read with Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'the Code') for impleading the Insurance Company, (respondent No. 6) and one Harbhajan Singh S/o Amrik Singh, who was registered as the owner of the truck in the office of...
Puran Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1994
Reported in: 1994(0)MPLJ295
S.K. Dubey, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner; who is a Deputy Commandant (DC) in BSF Academy, Tekanpur, has challenged the order of his transfer (Annexure P/22) dated 23-7-1993, to the extent the petitioner was directed to move from BSF Academy, Tekanpur, to 14 Bn., BSF, at Gandhidham, in Gujarat State. Petitioner has challenged the order of transfer as actuated by malice because the petitioner, for seeking seniority and promotions in the light of the order passed in M. P. No. 257 of 1980, decided on 8-2-1990 in case of Babu Joseph, filed a petition (M. P. No. 2840 of 1990) before this Court along with other petitioners wherein this Court, following the decision in the case of Babu Joseph, directed the respondents to consider the. case of the petitioner for promotion on higher post that of the Inspector at least on the date on which Baby Joseph became entitled for consideration and was considered and given promotion. After th...
Ram Gopal Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Road Trans. Corpn. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ845
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The appellant in this appeal claims enhanced compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident which took place on 12.11.1982 in the motor accident. The learned Member of the Claims Tribunal, under various heads of claim, awarded separate compensation, totalling Rs. 19,200/-.2. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant, in this appeal, has made some attempt to point out that the compensation awarded under different heads is too low and needs to be enhanced. Having perused the impugned order under appeal of the. Claims Tribunal, I do not find that the compensation awarded is unreasonably low or is arbitrary and not based on any record. There is thus no scope of interference with that part of the quantum.3. The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant, based on his application under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'the Code'), however, deserves serious consideration. Along with his application under Order 41, Rule ...
Ramgopal Vs. M.P. State R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1994
Reported in: II(1994)ACC264
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The appellant in this appeal claims enhanced compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident which took place on 12.11.1982 in the motor accident. The learned Member of the Claims Tribunal, under various heads of claim, awarded separate compensation, totalling Rs. 19,200/-.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the claimant, in this appeal, has made some attempt to point out that the compensation awarded under different heads is too low and needs to be enhanced. Having perused the impugned order under Appeal of the Claims Tribunal, I do not find that the compensation awarded is unreasonably low or is arbitrary and not based on any record. There is thus no scope of interference with that part of the quantum.3. The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant, based on his application under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'the Code'), however, deserves serious consideration. Along with his application under Order 41, Rule 2...
Dilip Kumar Gupta Vs. Ghanshyam Sharma and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1994
Reported in: II(1994)ACC329
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. In the motor accident, which took place on 13.10.1985, the property of the applicant was damaged who filed a claim petition in the Claims Tribunal. Summons on the application was issued and the report says that the Depot Manager of the respondent-Corporation at Saraipali refused to receive the same. The Claims Tribunal, therefore, proceeded ex-parte and passed an ex-parte award on 15.11.1989 awarding a sum of Rs. 12,000/- as compensation with 12% interest payable on the same. The respondent-Corporation, as late as on 25.1.1992, filed an application for setting-aside the ex-parte award. It was stated in the application that the Corporation derived knowledge of the passing of the ex-parte award only on 24.1.1992. The ground urged for setting aside, the ex-parte award was that the Corporation could have been validly served only through the Depot Manager, Raipur and the alleged refusal to accept the notice by the Depot Manager, Saraipali could not have been treated...
R.G. Agarwal and Co. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1994
Reported in: (1994)119CTR(MP)361; [1994]210ITR617(MP)
R.D. Shukla, J.1. The petitioners challenge their prosecution under Section 276C of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The brief history of the case is that petitioner No. 1, which is a firm, with petitioners Nos. 2, 3 and 4 as partners, submitted a return of income for the year 1981-82 and disclosed a loss of Rs. 22,198. They have also shown the payment of interest to the firm, Murlidhar Kishangopal, to the tune of Rs. 34,721 and further disclosed that they have received a loan from B. K. Lunia to the tune of Rs. 21,000.3. The Income-tax Officer did not accept this contention. Thereafter, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax, who accepted the appeal.4. Thereafter, an appeal was filed before the Tribunal by the Department. The Tribunal accepted the appeal and found that the loss shown as above and the loan from Shri B. K. Lunia are not correct.5. The petitioner thereafter made a prayer before the Tribunal for reference of the case to the High Court, which refu...
Chandramani Prasad Patwari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1994
Reported in: 1994(0)MPLJ254
ORDERS.K. Chawla, J.1. This order shall also govern disposal of Misc. Petition No. 328/83, Makarand Singh v. The Board of Revenue and Ors. and Misc. Petition No. 422/86, Kanta Prasad (deceased) through L. Rs. Bharat Bhushan and Ors. v. State of M. P. and Ors..2. In all these cases, orders of removal or dismissal of patwaris were passed preceded by departmental enquiries held against them. The matters ultimately reached Board of Revenue either in second appeal or revisions at the instance of the patwaris. In all the cases, the Board of Revenue held that second appeal or revision filed before it were not maintainable, since orders of removal and dismissal had been passed under M. P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter called the 'Classification Control Rules'), which could not be interfered by the Board of Revenue, being not orders passed under the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter called the 'Code'). All these petitions under Articles 22...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Samaylal Vishwanath Chandra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ843
P.N.S. Chouhan, J.1. On 8-6-1991 Babulal (P.W.I) had gone to Kharsia to see off his son who was to go to Gujarat that day by train. His wife Sobhna Ben was in his house at village Singhara about 20.00 kms. from Police Station Malkharoda. Family servant Bisesar (P.W.7) was with her. In the night to keep company with Sobhna Ben Geetabai (P.W.2) a lase of 14 years and Kaundi alias Kaushalaya (not examined) had come and after playing for some time the game of Kaudi with Sobhna Ben all of them went to sleep in the same house. Sobhna Ben slept on her cot while the two girls slept on a platform in the same room. In the adjoining room was Bisesar. During night miscreants broke open the window of the room where Sobhna Ben was sleeping and committed her murder and made good their escape with six thousand rupees cash and silver and gold ornaments. The two girls informed Bisesar of the tragedy. In the morning neighbour Chhotelal (P.W.8) was sent to Kharsia to inform Babulal. Chhotelal reached Khar...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Samaylal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ3407
P.N.S. Chouhan, J.1. On 8-6-1991 Babulal (P.W. 1) had gone to Kharsia to see off his son who was to go to Gujarat that day by train. His wife Sobhna Ben was in his house at village Singhara about 20.00 Kms. from Police Station Malkharoda. Family servant Bisesar (P.W. 7) was with her. In the night to keep company with Sobhna Ben Geetabai (P.W. 2) a lass of 14 years and Kaundi alias Kaushalya (not examined) had come and after playing for some time the game of Kaudi with Sobhna Ben all of them went to sleep in the same house. Sobhna Ben slept on her cot while the two girls slept on a platform in the same room. In the adjoining room was Bisesar. During night miscreants broke open the window of the room where Sobhna Ben was sleeping and committed her murder and made good their escape with six thousand rupees cash and silver and gold ornaments. The two girls informed Bisesar of the tragedy. In the morning neighbour Chhotelal (P.W. 8) was sent to Kharsia to inform Babulal. Chhotelal reached K...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »