Madhya Pradesh Court November 1998 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.
Sankata Devi Verma Vs. Jagdish Singh Chandel
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ497
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.Shri C.K. Swarnkar, learned counsel for applicant.Shri S.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the non-applicant.1. The applicant/landlady, being aggrieved by the order dated 19-11-1997, passed by the Rent Controlling Authority (RCA), Jabalpur rejecting her application filed under Section 13(6) of M.P. Accommodation Control Act, has filed this revision petition.2. The applicant/landlady moved an application under Section 23-A before the Rent Controlling Authority seeking eviction of the non-applicant inter alia pleading that she is the landlady and the non-applicant is the tenant. The tenant after seeking leave to defend filed his written statement and controverting the allegations made by the landlady stated that he is not the tenant and is not answerable to the present applicant. Having denied the relationship between the parties, the tenant did not choose to deposit the rent. The landlady thereafter filed an application under Section 13(6) of M.P. Accommodation Control Ac...
Babu Vs. Kacharu and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1998
Reported in: I(1999)ACC317; 2000ACJ559
Shambhoo Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed by the claimant against the award dated 26.11.1991 passed by IInd Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ratlam, in Claim Case No. 42 of 1987.2. The claimant's case was that his wife deceased Sugnabai, aged about 18 years, was engaged on 18.8.1987 as labourer on tractor-trolley bearing registration No. 88/75 owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3. Near village Ravti, she fell down from the trolley as a result of rash and negligent driving by respondent No. 1 and died instantaneously. The claimant filed claim case seeking compensation of Rs. 1,66,200. The respondents resisted the claim on the ground that the tractor-trolley was not driven rashly and negligently. It was averred by respondent No. 3 that respondent No. 1 driver had no valid licence, therefore, it was not liable to pay compensation. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 15,000. It exonerated respondent No. 3 insurance company from the liability of making payment...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Hemant Kumar S/O Mangalur Nishad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ669
Dipak Misra, J.1. In this appeal, the State of M.P. has assailed the defensibility of the judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Balod, District Durg, in Criminal Case No. 2180/95 dated 25-1-1988, whereby he has acquitted the respondent of the charge under Section 16(l)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 20-8-1985 at Village Dondi Lohra, the Food Inspector, R. R. Shrivastava (PW1) took sample of Sev (namkeen sev) from the shop of the accused-respondent. After completing all formalities, the said sample was sent to Public Analyst, who found that the prohibited colour had been used in the seized food. On receipt of the report and after obtaining consent as envisaged under Section 20 of the Act from the competent authority, the Food Inspector filed the complaint before the Magistrate concerned.3. The accused abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence. The further pl...
Cantonment Board, Sagar Vs. Sudhanshu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: AIR1999MP205; 1999(1)MPLJ667
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. The parties are heard finally.2. In a suit for injunction filed by the applicant/plaintiff -- Cantonment Board, they also prayed for an injunction against the non-applicant/defendant that he be restrained from raising illegal constructions. After hearing the parties, the trial Court, after appreciating the facts, rejected the application. In appeal against the said order, though the order was confirmed but the real question in controversy was not considered. The first appellate Court proceeded to decide the appeal on the ground that if the applicant/Cantonment Board which has to maintain the buildings and has to grant building permissions if has power and authority to demolish the illegal constructions, then an injunction in favour of such an authority is not required. Being aggrieved by the said order, the plaintiff/applicant has filed this revision petition. I have heard the parties at length.3. In the opinion of this Court, the first appellate Court misdirected ...
N.D. Singhal Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: I(1999)ACC39; 1999(1)MPLJ118
ORDERA.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a public interest litigation whereby the petitioner, who is an Advocate of this Court has brought this cause asserting serious problem facing claimants prosecuting their claim petitions before Tribunals. Therefore, he has prayed that respondents be directed that whenever an accident takes place and if any criminal case is registered against accused under Sections 304A and 279, Indian Penal Code he be charged for violation of Section 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 also. It is also prayed that a direction be given to the subordinate Judicial Courts to the effect that at the time returning of the vehicle on suparatnama the Criminal Courts should ensure that insurance policy of the vehicle is also seized and it should be their duty to see whether the vehicle in question is insured or not and whether the insurance is current or not. It is also prayed that in the event the vehicle is found to be not insured, then the claimant should be paid a sum of Rs. ...
Ratnakar Singh Chouhan Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ676
ORDER1. The petition is directed against the order dated 29-10-1998 passed in O.A. No. 1583/98 whereby the M. P. Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur disposed of the petition of petitioner Ratnakar Singh Chouhan as having become infructuous in view of the fact that subsequent order relating to the transfer dated 10-9-1998, whereby the petitioner was transferred as Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Rewa and also the order dated 17-9-1998, whereby the petitioner was transferred as Deputy Director/Project Officer, District Urban Development Authority, Satna have not been challenged.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri R.N. Singh.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner made three-fold submissions. Firstly, the petitioner is not under the obligation to challenge the orders which are passed during the pendency of the matter before the Service Tribunal especially in the case where the Tribunal has granted interim relief staying the operation of the order dated 25-7-1998, whereby th...
N.D. Singhal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: 1999ACJ933
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a public interest litigation whereby the petitioner, who is an advocate of this Court has brought this cause asserting serious problem facing claimants prosecuting their claim petitions before Tribunals. Therefore, he has prayed that respondents be directed that whenever an accident takes place and if any criminal case is registered against accused under Sections 304A and 279, Indian Penal Code he be charged for violation of Section 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 also. It is also prayed that a direction be given to the subordinate judicial courts to the effect that at the time of returning of the vehicle on suparatnama the criminal courts should ensure that insurance policy of the vehicle is also seized and it should be their duty to see whether the vehicle in question is insured or not and whether the insurance is current or not. It is also prayed that in the event the vehicle is found to be not insured, then the claimant should be paid a sum of Rs. 50...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ram Charan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ1341
A.K. Mathur, C.J. and S.S. Jha, J. 1. This appeal is by the insurance company against the award dated 5.2.1997 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shivpuri, in Claim Case No. 121 of 1994.2. The facts, for effective disposal of the appeal, are that deceased Uttam was crushed to death under dumper No. MP 08 A 1932 belonging to non-claimant No. 2 Gopal Ganesh Constructions and insured by non-claimant No. 3 the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. On 15.7.1994 it is alleged that the aforesaid dumper, being driven in rash and negligent manner by its driver Rakesh dashed against a tree as a result of which deceased Uttam who was employed as a cleaner with non-claimant No. 2 crushed under the dumper and died. Therefore, the present claim petition was filed by his mother, father and wife for compensation before the Tribunal.3. The Tribunal after recording necessary evidence came to the conclusion that the deceased Uttam was employed with non-claimant Gopal Ganesh Constructions, Shivpuri and...
Bhagwan Das Vs. Ram Charan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ370
ORDERTej Shankar, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 30-6-1997 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority, Guna.2. Briefly narrated facts are that the landlord-respondent filed a petition purporting to be under Section 23A of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter will be referred to as the 'Act')- With the allegation that he was the owner of the house situated in Subhash Colony on Agra Bombay Road, Guna, detailed in para 1 of the petition the defendant was the tenant in the portion marked by the red lines in the map attached with the petition. He was a teacher previously and retired from service on 31-7- 1993. He wanted to carry on business of Breakfast Centre in the disputed shop in which the, present petitioner was the tenant. He had no other vacant shop with him in which he could carry on business. He gave a notice to the present petitioner on 13-9-1993 terminating his tenancy and to vacate the shop, but no effect. He also did not pay the ...
State of Madhya Pradesh and ors. Vs. Arpana Shukla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1998
Reported in: AIR1999MP73; 1999(2)MPLJ91
B.A. Khan, J.1. THOUGH we were seized of two appeals directed against an interim stay order passed by writ Court dated 8-9-1998, parties prayed for disposal of the writ petitions alsoto put an end to the controversy for good. That is how we propose to dispose of the whole matter.2. Writ petitioners were candidates for admission to M.S./M.D. in general category in the State Medical Colleges for the session 1998. After they failed to qualify in their category they filed W.P. Nos. 460 and 461 of 1998 seeking quashment of circular dated 17-2-98 issued by the Government fixing minimum qualifying marks of 20% for Scheduled Caste candidates, 15% for Scheduled Tribe candidates and 40% for other Backward Class (OBC) candidates on the ground that it was not competent to lower the minimum qualifying standard below 40% in the face of the guidelines fixed by the Medical Council of India under Section 20 of the Medical Council Act and in terms of judgment of the Supreme Court in Dr. Sadhadevi's ease...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »