Madhya Pradesh Court March 1994 Judgments
Mahesh Kumar Bherulal Chawada Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2021
J.G. Chitre, J.1. This appeal has been directed towards the conviction and sentence recorded by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, against the appellant in S. T. No. 107/87 by which the learned trial Judge convicted him for offence punishable under Sections 366 and 376, I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo R. I. for the term of 5 and 7 years.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that in the night intervening 12-1 -1986 and 13-1 -1986 at about 2.30 a.m. or so, Sunita D/o Badrilal Zhorawat was missing from the house. Prosecution alleged that the present appellant induced her, took her away from her house and thereafter committed rape on her. It is the case of the prosecution that at that time Sunita was below 16 years of age.3. Prosecution story shows further that when Sunita was missing from the house, her brother named Datar Singh, her father Badrilal, her mother Kesharbai were searching her and when they were searching Sunita, her another brother named Kusum Kant, arrived at vil...
Tag this Judgment!Laxminarayan and anr. Vs. Sumitra Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP86; 1995(0)MPLJ148
M.V. Tamaskar, J. 1. This appeal is field against the judgment and decree passed by the First Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Balaghat in Civil Suit No. 6B/8-B decided on 10-4-1990, decreeing a claim for damages valued at Rs. 30,000/-.2. Laxminarayan was a son of one Chandanlal. Chandanlal and Mehtar are residents of the same village. Laxminarayan was a student and living at Balaghat. Chandanlal came to the house of Mehtar and proposed the marriage between his son Laxminarayan with Sumitra Bai, daughter ofMehtar aged about 16 years. After the said proposal made to Mehtar, Laxminarayan started visiting the house of Mehtar and persuaded Sumitra Bai to co-habit with him as they were going to be married soon. A suit was field on the allegation that on 15-4-1986 Mangni took place and the marriage ceremony was to be performed in April, 1987. The defendants denied that there was any such Mangni or contract to marry and denied that there was any cohabitation by Laxminarayan wi...
Tag this Judgment!Bank of Baroda Vs. Sitaram and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-1994
Reported in: [1995]82CompCas435(MP)
V.S. Kokje, J.1. This is an appeal against an order passed by the District Court dismissing an application for grant of injunction against auction of a truck by the Forest Officer. The appellant-bank has brought a suit against respondents Nos. 1 to 3 for recovery of a loan advanced to them. The loan was secured by hypothecation of a truck bearing No. MPN 5434. During the pendency of the suit, the said truck was seized by the Range Forest Officer in Snimoga District of Karnataka State, for violation of forest laws. On this an application was movad by the plaintiff-bank in the present suit for attachment before judgment of the truck. A notice of this application was sent to the Deputy Conservator of Forests concerned and he filed an objection. After hearing the parties, an order for attachment before judgment was granted and the court ordered that the vehicle should not be released as it was under attachment. The Forest Officer was added as a party in the suit. Thereafter, orders for con...
Tag this Judgment!Punit Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ91
ORDERU.L. Bhat, C.J.1. Petitioner is a young man aged 25 years. The writ petition does not give his occupation. He is present today in Court and he has told us that he owns a factory and till 1988 he was undertaking the work of civil contracts. The dispute in this case relates to award of contract for construction of masonry dam of Manikheda, which is a part of Sindh Dam Project. The work has been awarded to 6th respondent. Petitioner has filed this petition praying that the State of Madhya Pradesh and its officers may be directed not to enter into contract with 6th respondent or other respondents pursuant to their tenders. Return has been filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 5, 6th respondent has filed separate return.2. The tender notice was published on 2-5-1992. A copy of that is Annexure P-1. The tender-notice relates to construction of masonry dam as well as the road-side earthen dam. We are not concerned here with the earthen dam. The dispute relates only to the masonry dam....
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Om Prakash and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-1994
Reported in: 1994ACJ824
S.K. Dubey, J.1. Counsel heard.2. In a motor accident there were three deaths. The legal representatives of the deceased persons filed a joint claim petition claiming compensation. The Claims Tribunal recorded common evidence, as the issue of rashness and negligence was common, but thereafter, vide order dated 29.9.1987, directed the legal representatives of each of the deceased persons to file a separate claim so that the award, so far as it relates to the compensation, be passed separately.3. Learned counsel for the insurance company submitted that the Tribunal acted illegally and without jurisdiction giving an opportunity to the claimants to file separate petitions. The joint petition is not maintainable and now the separate claim petitions have become barred by time, but because of the order of the Tribunal the same shall be treated within limitation. It was also pointed out that prior to this order the claimants, when the matter came before this court earlier, stated before the co...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Garud Chaturvedi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-1994
Reported in: AIR1994MP160; 1994(0)MPLJ953
S.K. Dubey, J.1. The State of Madhya Pradesh has preferred this appeal under Section 54of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short, the 'Act', against the judgment and decree dated 21-4-1993, passed in Case No. 1/93- Reference by the Second Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Gwalior, whereby the Reference under Section 18 of the Act at the instance of the Department of the State Government for payment of the interest amounting to Rs. 5,67,804/- to the landowners, the claimants, on the amount of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, Gwalior, for short, the LAO, has been dismissed as not maintainable.2. The brief re'sume' of facts is necessary. On issue of notification dated 31-3-1989 under Section 4(1) of the Act, the land admeasuring 11.317 Hec., situated in village Bajhere, Tahsil Bhitarwar, District Gwalior, was acquired for the State Department, Water Resources Division, Gwalior. The LAO has, in Case No. 64-A/32-87-88, passed an award on 15-10-1991, fo...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Ram Krishna Balothia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-1994
Reported in: AIR1994MP143; 1994CriLJ2658; 1994(0)MPLJ644
P.P. Naolekar, J.1. The decision in this petition shall also govern disposal of the petitions, list of which is annexed herewith.2. The petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Act No. 33 of 1989) (for short hereinafter called the Act) in these petitions. Most of the petitioners are members of upper caste Hindus and some of them are Muslims. Offences under Section 3 of the Act are registered aginst the petitioners along with other provisions of the Indian Penal Code.3. The contentions raised by the petitioners for challenging the constitutional validity of the Act are; (i) the entire Act is based on caste discrimination and, therefore, infringes Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India and it is not saved under Article 15(4) of the Constitution; (ii) Section 3 of the Act provides for punishment for offences of atrocities against persons belonging to members of schedule castes and schedul...
Tag this Judgment!Mohta Ispat Ltd. Vs. Ratlam Municipal Corporation, College Road, Ratla ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP29; 1995(0)MPLJ47
U.L. Bhat, C.J. 1. Three companies owning factories within the limits of Ratlam Municipal Corporation have filed these writ petitions. The petitions raise common questions and, therefore, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Ratlam Municipality came into existence in 1944. In due course, it became a part of Madhya Bharat State and came to be governed by the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954 (hereinafter called the Act of 1954). Section 46 of the 1954 Act empowered Municipalities to make bye-taws in regard to various matters. Ratlam Municipality in 1956 made bye-laws in regard to levy and collection of property tax. In 1956, Madhya Bharat State became part of newly constituted State of Madhya Pradesh. In 1961, M. P. Municipalities Act was enacted repealing 1954 Act and certain other Acts. Ratlam Municipality became a Municipal Corporation with effect from 1-1-1981 and thereafter, Ratlam Municipal Corporation is governed by M. P. Municipal Corpo...
Tag this Judgment!imran Khan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1994
Reported in: 1994(0)MPLJ862
U.L. Bhat, C.J.1. Appellant has been convicted under Sections 302 and 498A, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for three years respectively. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The substance of charge against the appellant is that he committed the murder of his wife, Razda Begum. They were married a few months before the occurrence. The appellant was always finding fault with his wife for not bringing enough dowry and uttering abuses at her and even assaulting her. On 10-6-1986, the appellant took his wife from his house telling her that he would take her to Begum-gunj where her parents were residing and thereafter take her to Bhopal for a change. They had to reach Begum Gunj by walking through forest area. At about 9 p.m., when they were inside the forest, he started abusing his wife and when she protested, he assaulted her with a farsa, a sharp edged weapon and ran away. She fell down unconscious. Regaining c...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Malhotra (Dr.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ349
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. This is a public interest litigation. The petitioner is a serving medical officer. He has shown concern for the dead in the same manner in which medical profession cares for the living. Railway administration has been arrayed as one of the respondents. The question whether public interest litigation can be resorted in such matters is not res integra. In Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Thera v. Union of India and others, (1983) 4 SCC 598, Ranganath Misra, J. (as his Lordship then was), took cognizance of a petition filed against the Railways claiming protection under Articles 19 and 21. After taking note of the development of the Railways in this country right from British times, meaningful observations were made in paras 25 and 27 of the report. These read as under :-'We have said earlier that the Railways are a public utility service run on monopoly basis. Since it is a public utility, there is no justification to run it merely as a commercial venture with a view to making ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »