Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Babuliya Alias Babulal Vs. Mukeshkumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ646; AIR1998MP247
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. The short point which is invoked is whether the appellant is entitled to get the interim award in view of the provisions of Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for convenience). Shri Mehta submitted that the respondent No. 1 was driving the vehicle in question which was owned by respondent No. 2 which was insured with respondent No. 3. He further submitted that the injury has been substained by the appellant in the said accident and there is fracture to the leg of the appellant. Shri Mehta submitted that the Tribunal has rejected the prayer of the appellant for interim award pointing out that the certificate which has been filed by the appellant after one year is from a private doctor. He submitted that the view taken by the Tribunal is erroneous because that is not vitally decisive at this stage.2. Shri S.K. Jain submitted that the said certificate is take one and not from the doctor who medically treated the appellant. Sh...
Udariya Vs. Shub Warehousing Company and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
Reported in: AIR1998MP233; 1999(1)MPLJ290
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. The first point which has been urged by Shri Rajpal before the Court is that the compensation of Rs. 40000/- awarded to the appellant is less than the minimum amount which is being considered to be awardable in view of the present amendment in the Motor Vehicle Act (hereinafter referred to as Act, for convenience).The accident in question pertains to 25-3-87. The age of the deceased namely Mangilal was 5 years at that time. The minimum amount awardable as compensation which is Rs. 50,000/-, as submitted by Shri Rajpal, is the outcome of the new amendment. That cannot be applied to the accidents which are prior to the amendment. In addition to that, the age of the deceased has to be considered. As he happened to be a lad living in village, he would have been exposed to various hazards of the life which, are commonly acquainted with the village dwellers. This fact cannot be also ignored. Therefore, the issue for enhancement of the compensation amount of the appellant s...
Capt. S.S. Dabas Vs. Anil Kumar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ305
R.S. Garg, J.1. This order shall also dispose of M.A. Nos. 1200 and 1201 of 1997.2. In all the three cases, the Claims Tribunal has made awards under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, finding that these were cases of death and permanent disablement, as defined under Section 142 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.3. Mr. C.P. Namdeo, learned counsel for appellant submits that as mandatory requirements under rules 226 and 227 have not been complied with by learned Tribunal, nor by the claimants, an award under Section 140 of the Act could not be made in favour of the claimants.4. On the other hand, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that a bare reading of rules 226 and 227 of 1994 Rules would show that these are simply guidelines and not mandatory rules.5. After hearing parties, this court is of the opinion that rule 227 would not govern the provisions of Section 140 of the Act. A rule has to be in conformity with and is also subordinate to the main provision. Se...
Santosh Kumar Vs. Sanjay More and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ422; AIR1999MP62; 1998(2)MPLJ366
R.S. Garg, J. 1. The Tribunal has rejectedthe appellant's application filed under Section 142 holding that fracture/extraction of tooth would not be a permanent disablement under Section 142 of Motor Vehicles Act, therefore the appellant would not be entitled to an interim awardunder Section 140 of the Act. Being dissatisfied by the said order, the appellant/claimant has filedthis appeal.2. Shri Kanojiya, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the Tribunal was not justified in ignoring the provisions contained in Section 142 and was unjustified in rejecting the application. On the other hand Shri Jain and Shri Rao submit that extraction/destruction of the tooth would not be a permanent disability, therefore Section 140 would not be applicable at this stage. Counsel for the respondents also submit that for the purpose of Section 140 there must be a permanent disablement as defined under Section 142. According to them, nothing further can be added to Section 142.3. Section 140 p...
Govind Jangde and ors. Vs. Arun Kumar Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: AIR1998MP289
V.K. Agrawal, J.1. This appeal by the defendants/tenants who have been ordered to be evicted from the suit premises is directed against the judgment and decree dt. 2-12-87 by Vth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Appeal No. 68-A/86, reversing the decree dt. 2-9-86 of IXth Civil Judge, Class II in Civil Suit No. 629-A/87..2. It is no longer in dispute that the plaintiff/respondent is the landlord of the suit premisesbearing house No. 327/2 and 327/3 Gorakhpur,Jabalpur. The defendants/appellants are tenantstherein on the monthly rent of Rs. 75/-. Theplaintiff/respondent served a notice dt. 11 -8-81,which was amended, vide notice dt. 13-8-81 onthe defendants appellants for vacating the suitpremises. 3. The plaintiff/respondent averred that by virtue of deed of partition dt. 30-3-77 his father had partitioned the family property and in the said partition the suit premises had fallen in his share. Name of plaintiff/respondent also stands mutated in the Municipal records. It has b...
Harishankar Patel Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ217
ORDERD.P.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner was suspended from the office of the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Mokhaputka, Block and Tahsil Saraipali, District Raipur in exercise of the power under Section 39 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Mahasamund dated 17-7-1995. This order has been given challenge by means of the present petition seeking the relief for setting aside the show cause notice dated 19-4-1995 (Annexure-P/4) and the order of suspension dated 17-7-1995 (Annexure-P/6).2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri H. B. Agrawal and the learned State Counsel, Shri S. N. Khare.3. Counter affidavits and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged and the petition is being finally disposed of.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Section 39 of the Act the condition precedent for exercise of the power for suspension is the service of notice along wi...
Ashok Kumar Agrawal Vs. Om Prakash and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: II(1998)ACC569; 2000ACJ445
S.K. Dubey, J.1. Heard counsel.2. The appellant-claimant is an advocate who has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to seek enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded and also against order of Tribunal absolving the respondent No. 3 from its liability for the breach of the terms of the policy.3. The facts giving rise to this appeal are thus:The appellant was travelling as a passenger on payment of fare for going to Gwalior in jeep No. MP-07-B 0966 which was driven by respondent No. 1, owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with the respondent No. 3. The said jeep met with an accident on way near village Patara. As a result of which the appellant received injuries. The appellant averred that due to injuries he could not discharge his duties of his legal profession properly for a period of two months. Appellant claimed compensation of Rs. 1,25,500 for the injuries suffered by him. The owner and driver of the jeep remained ex parte before the Tribuna...
Ku. Premlata Chaddha Vs. Surendra Kumar Soni
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD(Cri)890; [1998]94CompCas808(MP); 1998CriLJ3657; 1998(2)MPLJ54
S.P. Khare, J. 1. This order will also govern the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 1964 of 1997. This appeal has been filed by the complainant against judgment dated July 17, 1995, in Criminal Case No, 844 of 1995, passed by Shri Sanjay Shukla, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jabalpur, by which the complaint has been held to be barred by limitation as provided in Section 142(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act').2. The facts relevant for decision of the point in issue as stated in the complaint are that accused Surendra Kumar Soni issued a cheque dated April 1, 1993, for Rs. 27,087 in favour of the complainant. It was drawn on the State Bank of India, Kamla Nehru Branch, Jabalpur. It was presented by the complainant for payment, but it was dishonoured vide memo dated April 6, 1993, for want of sufficient funds. The complainant sent the notice dated April 10, 1993, to the accused to pay the amount of the cheque. This notice was received ...
Laxman Balram Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)MPLJ431
R.P. Gupta, J.1. The appellant has been convicted by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhopal vide judgment dated 26-11-1988 for offence punishable Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for life. He has been found guilty of committing murder of Roopsingh about 2 days before 12-7-1987.2. The prosecution case against the appellant rests on circumstantial evidence only. The story is that on 8-7-1987 the deceased and his wife went to Bhopal. They came across this accused in Bhopal. The deceased and accused took liquor there and in discussion amongst them it was decided that the deceased should purchase a buffalo. For this purchase they sold the silver ornaments (Kadis) of the wife of the deceased i.e. Sonabai for Rs. 3,800/- to Chandramohan (PW7). Since it became late for transport to the village of the deceased, three of them stayed at the house of the accused. Next morning the deceased and his wife came to village Chopra. However it was decided between the deceased and th...
Deepchand and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3521
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. The applicants are aggrieved by the order dated 10-10-19 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhar in Cr. Misc. Case No. 200/96 transferring Sessions Trial No. 394/95 from 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar to the Special Judge, Dhar.2. The accused applicants are facing trial in the Sessions Court, Dhar.on the charges underSection 306 and 498A of IPC. The case was registered at S.T. No. 394/95 and made over for trial to the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge. However, at the fag end of the trial, when 9 prosecution witnesses were already examined, one Suresh Chandra, the father of the deceased on whose report the First Information Report in the case was registered, moved Transfer Application underSection 408, Cr. P.C. before the Sessions Judge. Some personal allegations were made against the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge (Smt. Jaishree Verma, who now stands transferred to some other Sessions Division). The learned Sessions Judge by his order impugned, although held that the allegations...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »