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.
Badri Prasad Chikwa and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1998
Reported in: AIR1999MP38; 1998(2)MPLJ361
ORDERD.P.S. Chauhan, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the State Government dated 19-2-96, which is Annexure-P-1 to the petition, the petitioners Badri Prasad Chikwa and Smt. Satanhai have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking relief for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 19-2-96 and for direction in the nature of mandamus, to the respondents for permitting the petitioners being continued as councillors of the Nagar Panchayat, Amarpatan, District Satna, Madhya Pradesh. 2. Since in the petition, the return has been filed and this Court on 3-3-97 passed an order for final disposal this petition is being finally disposed of with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Both the petitioners i.e. Badri Prasad Chikwa and Smt. Satanhai were the members of Nagar Panchayat Amarpatan and in a special meeting convened for their removal, a resolution was passed for their removal on 16-9-95 and the same was sen...
Sardar Rajinder Singh Vs. Bhupinder Kaur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1998
Reported in: I(1999)DMC39
R.S. Garg, J.1. This order shall also dispose of Misc. Appeal No. 482/97.2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 14.2.1997, passed in M.J.C. No. 31/96 and M.J.C. No. 32/96, the appellant has preferred Misc. Appeal Nos. 481/97 and 482/97.3. Mr. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the Trial Court was not justified in rejecting the appellant's application for setting aside ex-park decree and for restoration of his claim for divorce. He submits that the appellant's mother was unwell from 21st July, 1996, therefore, he could not appear when the case was called on for hearing, but when he reached the Court at about 1 p.m., met his Counsel, then only he came to know that the matter has been proceeded ex-parte before 1 p.m. According to the appellant, the Trial Court was unjustified in proceeding ex-parte in the first part of the day and secondly was also not justified in rejecting the application when it is proved on record that the did come to the Court on 23rd July. He subm...
Santosh Champalal JaIn Vs. Smt. Vimla Bai Wd/O Champalal Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)MPLJ164
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. The appellant being dissatisfied by the order dated 24-9-1995 passed in Civil Suit No. 9-A/93, by the IIIrd A.D.J. to the Court of the District Judge, Chhindwara, has preferred this appeal. Shri Diwakar learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Court below erred in applying the provisions of Section 16(1) of the Indian Arbitration Act and further erred in holding that the award could be remitted to the arbitrator only for reconsideration and not for rewriting it on Stamp Paper and for its registration. He submits that the Court itself could have impounded the document after recovering the duty and imposing the penalty. It was not required to remit the award to the arbitrator but was required to send it to the Collector, Stamps after recovering duty and imposing penalty. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. Dilip Corporation, AIR 1969 SC1238, and a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the matte...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›