Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Khitai Bhurelal Patel Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ1017
ORDERN.P. Singh, J.1. This revision shall also govern disposal of Criminal Revision No. 22 of 1990, as common questions of law are involved in both the criminal revisions.2. Criminal Revision No. 16 of 1990, is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 6-1-1990 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sihora in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1988, whereby he dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence of the applicant as passed by the trial Magistrate.3. The applicant in this case was prosecuted for an offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') for selling adulterated groundnut oil and he was convicted thereunder and sentenced to undergo R. I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo S. I. for two months.4. Whereas, the Criminal Revision No. 22 of 1990 is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10-1-1990...
Khitai Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3244
ORDERN.P. Singh, J.1. This revision shall also govern disposal of Criminal Revision No. 22 of 1990, as common questions of law are involved in both the criminal revisions.2. Criminal Revision No. 16 of 1990, is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 6-1-1990 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sihora in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1988, whereby he dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence of the applicant as passed by the trial Magistrate.3. The applicant in this case was prosecuted for an offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (here in after referred to as the 'Act') for selling adulterated groundnut oil and he was convicted there under and sentenced to undergo R. I. For six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo S. I. for two months.4. Whereas, the Criminal Revision No. 22 of 1990 is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10-1-...
T. Martibai Vs. Kamal Puri and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ774
S.K. Dubey, J.1. The appellant-claimant has filed this appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, against the award dated 13.11.1987 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vidisha, in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1986, whereby the application of the appellant-claimant, for compensation, was rejected as barred by time.2. The accident occurred on 27.11.1984 while the application for compensation was filed on 1.7.1986. The period for filing of the application for compensation under Section 110-A is six months. However, power has been given to the Tribunal under proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 110-A to condone delay, if sufficient cause is made out.3. The appellant-claimant, in her application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay, assigned the reason that the claimant is a widow of the deceased and is a rural rustic and was not aware whether any application could be filed to claim compensation for the death of her husband arising out of the m...
State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Smt. Jyoti Kaul and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ608; AIR1995MP108
S.K. Dubey, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the award dated 26-6-1993 in Case No. 52 of 1988, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Guna, for short, the 'Tribunal' awarding compensation of Rs. 3,65,400/- to the widow and two minor children for the death of Amar Kishan Kaul, an Executive Engineer, in Gopi Sagar Division, Guna, who died of motor accident on 6th July, 1988 by the use of Government Jeep No. CRZ 3958, owned by the Government of Madhya Pradesh and driven by Basheer Khan, the driver.2. The State of Madhya Pradesh has challenged the award of compensation being excessive, while the claimants have filed the appeal for enhancement of the compensation.3. The facts relating to the accident caused by rash and negligent driving by the driver are not disputed, nor the finding of the Tribunal, holding the driver being rash and negligent have been challenged. Hence, it is not necessary to state the circumstances in which the accident occurred. As there is a serious challeng...
M.P.S.R.T.C. and anr. Vs. NaraIn Singh Rathore and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: (1995)ILLJ899MP; 1994(0)MPLJ959
ORDERU.L. Bhat, C.J.1. This is a petition under Articles 227 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari quashing Annexure-P1 order passed by the Industrial Court and Annexure-P2 appellate order passed by the Labour Court.2. First respondent was initially appointed Conductor under the first petitioner M.P. State Road Transport Corporation and later on, promoted to the post of Booking Agent. According to Annexure- P3 order of the General Manager of the Corporation, the promotion channel is from the post of Booking Agent to that of Ticket Examiner and thereafter to the post of Traffic Supervisor Gr. II and finally to the post of Traffic Supervisor Gr. I.3. While first respondent was working as Booking Agent in the Bus Station, Dabra, Nathilal Jain who was then Traffic Supervisor Gr. II and working as Incharge of the Bus Station, retired on superannuation. The Sub-Depot Manager passed order Annexure-P8 dated April 9, 1986 the English version of which is as quoted herebel...
Shail Kumari Wd/O Bhuvneshwar Prasad Gupta and ors. Vs. Dinesh Singh a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ524
ORDERP.N.S. Chouhan, J.1. Thick No. M.H. G.6804 driven by respondent No. 1 Dinesh Singh who was the authorised driver of vehicle's owner Shikhar Chand Jain, respondent No. 2, dashed against Bhuvneshwar Prasad on 22-10-1983 resulting in his death. On the date of the accident the said vehicle was insured with respondent No. 3. Appellants who arc legal heirs of deceased Bhuvneshwar Prasad presented a claim under Section 110A of Motor Vehicles Act for compensation of Rs. 3,41,000/-. IXth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, by award dated 17-7-1991, passed in M. V. Case No. 169/89 allowed the claim to the extent of Rs. 58,000/- and interest at the rate of 15% per annum. However, the Tribunal held that the insurance company was not liable for two reasons, namely, driving licence of respondent No. 1 was not produced and, therefore, it was inferred that he was driving the vehicle at the pertinent time without a valid licence which involved breach of the insurance agreement an...
Prakash Rustam Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ799
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. I am dealing with this matter in view of the order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this High Court.2. This is the second bail application of the applicant. The previous bail application hearing number Misc. Cri. Case No. 3492/93 has been decided on merit on 19-1-1994. The bail was granted to two accused-applicants namely Rustam s/o Chhotu and Dinesh s/o Rustam. However, the prayer for bail made by the present applicant was dismissed by Hon'ble Justice R. D. Shukla. The reason given for releasing the applicants-accused Rustam s/o Chhotu and Dinesh s/o Rustam was that the charge-sheet was not filed against them within the period of 90 days. Thus, the accused-applicants were released on bail in view of the provisions of Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Code'). In the said order, it was observed that so far as the accused-applicant Prakash s/o Rustam, was concerned the charge-sheet was filed against him within the pe...
Prakash S/O Rustam Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ869
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J. 1. I am dealing with this matter in view of the order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this High Court.2. This is the second bail application of the applicant. The previous bail application hearing number Misc. Cri. Case No. 3492/93 has been decided on merit on 19-1-1994. The bail was granted to two accused-applicants namely Rustam S/o Chhotu and Dinesh S/o Rustam. However, the prayer for bail made by the present applicant was dismissed by Hon'ble Justice R. D. Shukla. The reason given for releasing the applicants-accused Rustam S/o Chhotu and Dinesh S/o Rustam was that the charge-sheet was not filed against them within the period of 90 days. Thus, the accused-applicants were released on bail in view of the provisions of Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Code'). In the said order, it was observed that so far as the accused-applicant Prakash S/o Rustam, was concerned the charge-sheet was filed against him within the pe...
The Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd., Lashkar Vs. Ramsingh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ26; AIR1995MP171; 1995(0)MPLJ139
S.K. Dubey, J. 1. This appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, for short, the Act; has been filed by the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company, Ltd. against the award dated 21-2-1983, passed in claim case No. 1 of 1981, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior, for short, the `Tribunal', whereby compensation of Rs. 41,500/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum plus costs of Rs. 700/- was awarded to the injured/claimant for the injuries/ fracture of rib Nos. 4, 5, 6 and clavical caused in an accident on 10-12-1979 at about 10.30 a. m. by the use of motor vehicle, passenger bus No. MPH 448, driven by respondent No. 4 during the course of employment of respondent No. 3.2. Claimant/respondent No. 1, after notice of the appeal, filed cross-objections Under Order XLI, Rule 22, CPC, for enhancement of the compensation. During the pendency of the appeal, the injured claimant died hence, his name was deleted, as his legal representative, the respondent No. 2...
Feran Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-1994
Reported in: I(1995)DMC94
Shacheendra Dewivedi, J.1. The petitioners have challenged the order of framing of the charges against them in S.T. No. 216/91, or the offence under Section 306 of I.P.C.2. The petitioner's Counsel contended that there was no evidence of any instigation to the deceased to commit suicide. It is further submitted that the deceased was married with petitioner No. 1 Feran Singh about 8-9 years ago. She is alleged to have committed suicide on 18-2-91. On this contention the argument is developed that the legal presumption was not available to the prosecution against the petitioners as the marriage was not held within seven years from the date of incident.3. At the state of charge, Court is only to consider whether there is a strong suspicion of the commission of offence against the accused persons, or that if the production allegations were accepted as they were whether the conviction of the accused-persons could be founded on that material or not.4. The intention of the accused-persons and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »