Madhya Pradesh Court October 1995 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.
Mangalsingh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1908
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The appellants have been convicted for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 149, 325 read with Sections 149 and Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence under Section 302 r/w Section 149, I. P. C. they all have been sentenced to life imprisonment and for other offences they have been sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment by the judgment dated 29-12-1987 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri. The appellants have assailed their convictions in this appeal.2. The prosecution case as per the version in the First Information Report, Ex. PW. 1, and the oral testimony of the witnesses, P. W. 1 to P. W. 4, it is as under:-Cattle of accused Thakurdas had strayed into the field of Roshansingh, P. W. 1 and damaged the standing wheat crop. Roshansingh, therefore, went to the house of accused Thakurdas on 13-1-1986 at 6.00 in the evening to raise the protest and to warn him that in future if cattle damages the crop he would sen...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Shahnaz Begum and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC462
R.S. Garg, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 against the order dated 16.4.1990 passed in Case No. 27/28/WC by the Commissioner Workmen's Compensation Act, Ambikapur, wherein the appellant/employer was directed to pay Rs. 84,716/- towards the compensation and 25% penalty on the said amount.2. The brief facts leading to the case are that on 28.7.1985 deceased Akhtar Ali, s/o Akbar Ali who was working as first fireman, died in a Railway accident on the spot. The deceased at the time of the death was married to respondent 1 and was having a son named Asif Ali.3. On the above said allegation respondent 1 moved an application under Section 20 of the Workmen's Compensation Act seeking compensation of Rs. l,60,968.43 and imposition of the penalty was also sought under Section 4A of the Act. (Interest @ 15% was also claimed.4. The present appellants appeared before the Commissioner but did not file its written statement. Therefore, the right to file...
P.K. Misra Vs. Smt. Saribai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC342
N.P. Singh, J.1. Mr. H.C. Kohli, Counsel for the applicant. He is heard on the question of admission as also on I. A. No. 4756/ 95 for stay of execution proceedings.2. This revision is directed against the order passed by the 1st Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in Motor Vehicle Case No. 423/94 whereby he rejected the application of the applicant to decide the preliminary objection as to whether truck bearing Registration No. MPQ 5896 was involved in the accident or not.3. The stand of the applicant is that the registration of truck No. MPQ 5896 was called by the R.T.O., Jabalpur on 1.10.1992, prior to the accident which took place on 26.7.1993 and the vehicle was sold as scrap to the dealer. These are matters of enquiry and can be considered by the Trial Court during evidence.4. There is no merit in this revision, which is accordingly dismissed. However, in the meanwhile, the order passed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 shall be kept in abeyance.5. The...
Shaheen Qureshi Vs. Shakil Ahmed
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-1995
Reported in: I(1997)DMC259
Tej Shanker, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the husband Shakil Ahmed with the allegation that the parties were married on 21.7.1989 at Jamna Marriage Bhawan, Dana Oli, Lashkar, Gwalior. The details of presentation have been narrated in Para 2 of the petition which are/ not relevant for the disposal of this appeal. After the marriage the respondent went to her husband's house and on 22.7.1989, she went back to her parents' house. Again on 23.7.1989 she was brought by the plaintiff-respondent and she remained there till 28.7.1989. She went again to her maayaka and returned on 4.8.1989. She lived there till 14.8.1989. When the plaintiff-respondent returned from his duty he found the house locked and came to know from the neighbours that the petitioner went alongwith a lady and a man and articles. When he made search she met him at her parent's house. She told him as her mother was ailing she will return after she was cured. She gave t...
Sadaram Vs. Akay Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC354
N.P. Singh, J.1. They are heard.2. This revision is directed against the order dated 5.8.1993 passed by the Second Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No. 12/92 dismissing the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the claim case.3. On 12.5.1991 the applicant met with motor accident and sustained physical injuries. He undergone treatment of his injuries and thereafter on 21.4.1992 he filed a claim case for grant of compensation and also moved an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the claim case after the expiry of the statutory period of six months. On the ground that he was ignorant of provisions of limitation in filing the claim case.4. The learned Claims Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay holding that the ignorance of law is not excuse and sufficient cause was not made out for condonation of delay in absence of any medical certificate filed with t...
Mishri Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC151
R.S. Garg, J.1. The appellant has preferred this Misc. Appeal under Section 82(1)(2) of Indian Railways Act, being aggrieved by the award dated 24.9.1986 passed in Claim Case No. 78/85 by Adhoc Claims Commissioner (Musra Railway Accident), Durg.2. The applicant filed the application under Section 82(c) of Indian Railways Act claiming compensation on the grounds that his two sisters Ranibai and Sushilabai were travelling in the train on 22.2.1985, unfortunately because of the accident both the sisters died in the accident. The appellant submitted that he was dependent on the deceased, therefore, he was entitled to make an application for damages/ compensation.3. The learned Claims Tribunal held that in view of the language of Section 2(b) which defines the dependents, the appellant does not fall within the definition. A brother is not included in the definition of dependent. The Court below was of the opinion that each of the sister was earning about 200-250 rupees a month and under pre...
Preme Chand Vs. Sita Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-1995
Reported in: I(1996)DMC508
S.B. Sakrikar, J.1. This is a revision directed against the order dated 14.12.1992 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas Camp Kannod in Criminal Revision No. 7/90. Thereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge set-aside the order dated 14.12.1989 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Khategaon in Misc. Criminal Case No. 9/89 by which the learned Magistrate found the non-applicant entitled for the recovery of maintenance allowance preceding one year from the date of filing of the application dated 3.3.1989 under Section 125(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The brief facts of the case are that the non-applicant Sitabai filed an application against the present applicant under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for awarding maintenance allowance to herself and also to her minor child. The maintenance claimed by her was Rs. 300/- per month. The said application was opposed by the applicant Premchand. The learned Trial Court by its order dated 1.11.1...
Kamal Pushp Enterprises Vs. D.R. Construction Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1996MP139; 1996(0)MPLJ240
ORDERTejshankar, J.1. This revision petition raises an important question of law with respect to the applicability of Section 69(3) of the Indian Partnership Act to the proceedings which arise out of a filing of an Award by the Arbitrator. Admittedly there was a contract with the petitioner by Gas Authority of India Ltd., Vijaypur, Tahsil Raghogarh, District Guna (hereinafter referred to as GAIL) for horticulture work. After this agreement with the GAIL the petitioner entered into an agreement with the respondent for carrying out the said work of horticulture in GAIL. A dispute had arisen between the petitioner, on one hand, and the respondent, on the other, and the matter was referred to sole arbitrator Shri Padam Kumar Jain, Advocate, Guna, with the consent of both the parties. The Arbitrator after recording necessary evidence and hearing parties passed an Award on 6-12-93 and submitted it on 2-2-94 before the District Judge, Guna, for making the Award rule of the Court. Notices Unde...
Vinod Tiwari and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1995
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ247
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. This application under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') for cancellation of blanket order of bail passed under Section 438 of the Code by Shri Rampal Singh, J. (since retired) as the non-applicant No. 2 apprehended his arrest for several accusations under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The application for cancellation of blanket order of bail was heard by Mr. Justice G. C. Gupta (as he then was), who vide order dated 11-1-1991 cancelled the blanket order of bail. Non-applicant No. 2 approached the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court disposed of the Criminal Appeal No. 698 of 1991 arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 706/91, vide order dated 12th November, 1991 setting aside order of cancellation of bail and remitted the case for reconsideration by this Court with a direction that the application for cancellation of bail be assigned by learned Chief Justice to Seniormost Judge available in the High Court (Mr. Justic...
Badri Prasad Mathur and anr. Vs. Administrator, Nagar Palika Parishad ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1995
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ746
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. The brief facts for the purposes of this petition be noticed as under.2. A civil suit bearing No. 96-A/1988 was dismissed in default. The counsel pleaded no instructions on 6th of April, 1994. Later on, an application was preferred for getting the suit restored. This application was dismissed by the trial Court on 1st of October, 1994. Against the above order, an appeal was preferred. This appeal stands dismissed on 7th of July, 1995. The order passed by the trial Court seeking restoration has been confirmed. While doing so, some remarks have also been made against the counsel.3. In this petition, two grievances have been made :(i) that, the remarks which have been made against the counsel should be expunged; and(ii) that, the order by which the appeal was dismissed be also set aside.4. There can be no dispute with the proposition that uncalled for remarks are not to be made in judicial proceedings. The judicial propriety require that only that much matter should...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »