Madhya Pradesh Court May 1994 Judgments
Bhagwati Prasad Vs. Ushadevi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-27-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP205
S.K. Dubey, J. 1. This is defendant's second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28-3-1981, passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Vidisha, in Civil Appeal No. 37-A/80, preferred against the judgment and decree dated 10-4-1980, passed in Civil Suit No. 28-A/1976 by the Civil Judge, Class I, Vidisha. 2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are these. The plaintiffs/ respondents Nos. 1 and 2, instituted a suit against the appellant and his brother Onkar Prasad, for possession, permanent injunction and for recovery of mesne profits relating to suit land, area 24.250 hectares, described in para 1 of the plaint on the averment that originally the suit land was part of the joint holding of the two defendants in equal share. Appellant Bhagwati Prasad sold his share by a registered sale-deed dated 29-8-1970 to Trimbak Rao for a consideration of Rs. 900/-. Trimbak Rao, in turn, sold the land so purchased to the plaintiffs vide sale-deed dated 17-8-1971. The plaintiffs are th...
Tag this Judgment!Chironjilal and ors. Vs. Khatoon Bi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-27-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP238; 1994(0)MPLJ923
S.K. Dubey, J.1. The defendants No. 4 to 7 have preferred this second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28-1-1980 passed by First Additional District Judge (Camp Basoda) Vidisha in Civil Appeal No. 23-A/ 1978, preferred against the judgment and decree d^ted 20-2-1978 passed in Civil Suit No. 502-A of 1975 by Civil Judge, Class I, Basoda.2. Material facts leading to this appeal are these :-- The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 instituted a suit on 21-10-1975 against the respondents No. 2 to 4 (defendants No. 1 to 3) and the appellants-defendants No. 4 to 7, in respect of the suit land, area 90 bighas and 10 biswas, described in para 3 of the judgment of the First Appellate Court, for declaration and possession and for mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 1,000/ - per annum on the averments, that the plaintiff is the sole owner of the suit land, the sale deed executed on 23-6-1973 by the defendant No. 1 the mother of defendants No. 2 and 3 as their guardian for half of the land in favo...
Tag this Judgment!Shakun Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-27-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ64
Tej Shankar, J.1. Both these appeals arise out of a claim petition presented by Shakun, wife of Suresh Dheemar, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It appears that Suresh, husband of claimant Shakun and son of Puniya, was a temporary employee in the Irrigation Department and was earning a sum of Rs. 450/- p.m. On 31.10.1986 he was going on the site on truck No. MPZ 8125. It was being driven by Shiv Lahri rashly and negligently. Due to his rash and negligent driving it turned turtle near village Sallaiya and Suresh Dheemar was badly injured. He was sent to Gwalior hospital but declared dead. The police had arrived at the place of occurrence and registered a case against Shiv Lahri driver under Section 304A, Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner claimed herself to be the wife of deceased Suresh Dheemar. Puniya is his mother. The claimant further claimed that had Suresh not died he would have lived since 70 years of age and would have mended his sons. She had suffered men...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Brajendra Singh Chouhan Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-25-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP23; 1995(0)MPLJ331
T.S. Doabia, J.1. Dr. Brajendra Singh Chouhan prays that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to permit him to continue with course of study namely Diploma Course in the discipline of Clinical Pathology, to which discipline he was granted admission by the respondent authorities in G. R. Medical College, Gwalior on 30th of January 1993. A writ of Certiorari is also claimed and a prayer has been made to quash the action of respondents by which the admission was initially suspended on 1-2-1993 and later on cancelled.2. The basic question involved in this petition is whether the petitioner should be permitted to continue his course of study in Diploma Course in the discipline of Clinical Pathology in the G.R. Medical College, Gwalior when the vacancy arose in the middle of academic session.3. When this petition came up for final hearing before a Division Bench consisting of Sacheendra Dwivedi and S. K. Chawla, JJ., there was a defence of opinion. Dwivedi. J. was of the op...
Tag this Judgment!Ramsingh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP154; 1995(0)MPLJ369
T.S. Doabia, J. 1. This litigation has come for the second time to this Court. Earlier on 5th of March, 1980, this Court on the basis of consensual submissions made by the parties remanded the case to the Additional District Judge. He was to determine whether the disputed structures were in existence prior to 15th of August, 1950 or not. It was submitted before this Court that Tahsildar had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings with regard to encroachments made by raising construction on the disputed land (in the Madhya Bharat Region) before the 15th day of August, 1950 by resorting to Section 248(1)(ii) of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). It was contended that all these provisions have not been properly appreciated. It was further contended that the entries in Zild Bandobast Samvat 1996 were also not given due consideration and, therefore, this question required to be remanded back. The Court observed as under:-- '. . . . .The possession of ...
Tag this Judgment!Banarasidas and anr. Vs. Ramkrishna and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP147
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J. 1. A suit bearing CO.S. No. 7A of 1994 is pending in the Court of Vllth Civil Judge Class 11, Gwalior. In this suit an application under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) was filed. This was to the effect that the plaintiff may not be dispossessed from a piece of land admeasuring 2 ft. x 23 ft. This piece of land is located at a place known as Jiyajee Chowk in Gwalior. It was alleged that the Municipal Corporation Gwalior is threatening to demolish the structure which is admittedly raised on a drain by the side of a public street. There is some dispute regarding the nature of the structure so raised. According to Shri Roman, learnedcounsel for the petitioner, this structure was of permanent, nature. This position is disputed by the' counsel for the Municipal Corporation and also by the respondents-defendants Nos. 1 to 5.2. In the application under Order 39, Rule 1 of the Code interim injunction to the effect...
Tag this Judgment!Rambharose Singh Vs. Hemlata Aathle
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-23-1994
Reported in: AIR1994MP198
V.S. Kokje, J.1. This appeal was heard onthe point of tenability. The lower appellateCourt has dismissed the appeal before itholding it to be time barred, rejecting anapplication Under/Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Therespondents has raised a preliminary objection that no second appeal is tenable againstan order dismissing an application Under/Section 5 ofthe Limitation Act and consequently dismissing an appeal Under/Section 96 of C.P.C. Thelearned counsel for the respondent relied onthe decision of the Supreme Court in RajaKulkarni v. State of Bombay, AIR 1954 SC73 : 1954 Cri LJ 351) a decision of M.P. HighCourt in Balkrishna v. Tulsabai, AIR 1987MP 120, a Full Bench decision of'Orissa HighCourt in Ainthurcharan v. Sitaram, AIR 1984Ori 230 as also a Division Bench decision ofM.P. High Court in Laxmibai v. NaguramKhilawandas, 1992 JLJ 458 has been cited insupport of the contention that a secondappeal is not tenable against an order dismissing first appeal as time barred rejectingan ...
Tag this Judgment!Jawaharlal Vs. Dhuria and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP133
T.S. Doabia, J. 1. This is plaintiffs appeal. He filed a suit claiming damages against the defendants. It was pleaded that cattle belonging to the defendants had caused damage to mustard crop of the plaintiff. Trial Court granted damages to the extent of Rs. 250/-. Nine of the defendants preferred an appeal against the decree passed by the trial Court. Name of Jamuna Prasad, defendant No. 10 did not figure in the memo of parties. This appeal was allowed by the first appellate Court. The plaintiff feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the first appellate Court has preferred the present appeal.2. A preliminary objection has been raised by the counsel for the defendant that this appeal is not competent in view of the bar created by Section 102 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. His contention is that the matter in this appeal is such as would fall within the purview of Small Cause Court, the claim being less than Rs. 3,000/-. Accordingly, I have treated this appeal as revisio...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Vimla Gangotia and anr. Etc. Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ53; AIR1994MP201; 1994(0)MPLJ891
1. The two appeals have been filed against the award dated 24-12-1991 passed in Claim Case No. 1 of 1989, by the Member, Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal,Datia (for short, the 'Tribunal').2. Misc. Appeal No. 74 of 1992 is of the claimants for enhancement of compensation and for setting aside the award so far it relates to apportionment of the liability of payment of compensation in equal proportion by the insurer and owners of the two offending vehicles.3. Misc. Appeal No. 66 of 1992 is by the owner and driver of the passenger bus No. CPW 6790, involved in the accident, which challenges the award as excessive and also the award specifying the amount 'of compensation payable by the Insurance Company limiting to Rs. 50,000/- of its statutory liability under Section 95 (2)(b)(i) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 as amended (for short, the 'Act of 1939')4. Claimant No. 1 is the widow andclaimant No. 2 is the daughter of the deceasedArun Kumar, who died because of the motoraccident, occurred on...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Reference U/S 113 of Civil Procedure Code by District Judge
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ94
ORDERU.L. Bhat, C.J.1. This reference is made by the District Judge, Jabalpur under Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure. We issued notices to the Advocate General, High Court Bar Association and the Jabalpur District Bar Association, indicating that we were prepared to hear any counsel who may examine the legal position and make a useful contribution to the decision on the question referred to.2. We have heard Shri'N. S. Kale, Shri Ravish Agrawal, Shri R. S. Tiwari, Shri Deepak Verma, Shri H. B. Agrawal, Shri R. P. Jain and the Addl. Advocate General Shri Anoop Choudhary.3. Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) confers on the High Court what is known as revisional power. The power consists of calling for the record of the case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to the High Court and in which no appeal lies and the subordinate Court appears to have exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law or to have failed to exercise jurisdiction so v...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »