Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
Prem NaraIn Sharma Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-1998
Reported in: AIR1998MP229
ORDERTej Shankar, J. 1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been preferred by the petitioner Prem Narain for quashing the impugned order (Annex. P/9). He claimed that he was a small bus operator and was operating buses under the permit granted by the authorities concerned. He had applied for a Stage Carriage permit on the routes (1) Ashoknagar to Kadwaya via Saraskhedi, Isagarh, Gahora and Manethi for 2 R.T. daily and (2) Ashoknagar to Isagarh for one R.T. daily vide Annexure P/l. He had furnished all the certificates, documents and authenticated route map in compliance of Rule 72(3) of the M.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994. He had deposited Rs. 500/- under Rule 145 of the M. P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994. The substance of the application (Annex. P/l) was notified on office notice board for inviting objections. M.P. State Road Transport Corporation filed formal objections. He was granted stage carriage permit vide order dated 27-8-97 (Vide Annexure P/2) for a p...
Gajra Gears Ltd. Vs. Smt. Ashadevi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-1998
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas489(MP)
N.K Jain, J.1. By this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner, a public limited company, seeks quashment of the order dated February 28, 1996, passed by the Sessions Judge, Dewas, in Cr. Rev. No. 9 of 1996, in affirmance of the order dated October 20, 1995, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dewas, dismissing the petitioner's complaint against the respondent under section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act').2. The respondent, Smt. Ashadevi is the widow of the late Shri Ram Pravesh Singh who was an employee of the petitioner-company and died while serving with the company. The petitioner-company filed a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dewas, against the respondent alleging commission of the offence under section 630 of the Act and it was averred that the respondent has after the death of her husband, failed to hand over vacant possession of the premises allotted by the company to her husband.3. The learned Chief J...
N.K. Pal Vs. Smt. Uma Pal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-1998
Reported in: II(1998)DMC490; 1998(2)MPLJ27
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the husband under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 (for short the Act) against the dismissal of his petition for divorce by the Court of III Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bhopal.2. According to the husband's case, the parties were married on 18th of November, 1981. They both belonged to Bengali community. The husband is employed in the Post and Telegraph Department at Bhopal. The wife has now taken up service in Military Engineering Services on the post of Centre Incharge.3. The present appeal was dismissed by this Court on 28.1.1992 only on the ground of bar of limitation by rejecting the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. The husband preferred a special leave petition is the Supreme Court in which by order dated 25th April, 1994 the case has been remitted to this Court with directions to condone the delay in filing the appeal and to decide the same on merit...
Prem NaraIn Ramlal Sharma Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ185
ORDERTej Shankar, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been preferred by the petitioner Prem Narain for quashing the impugned order (Annex.P/9). He claimed that he was a small bus operator and was operating buses under the permit granted by the authorities concerned. He had applied for a Stage Carriage permit on the routes (1) Ashoknagar to Kadwaya via Sarashkhedi, Isagarh, Gahora and Manethi for 2 R.T. daily and (2) Ashoknagar to Isagarh for one R.T. daily vide Annexure P/1. He had furnished all the certificates, documents and authenticated route map in compliance of Rule 72(3) of the M.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994. He had deposited Rs. 500/- under Rule 145 of the M.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994. The substance of the application (Annexure P/1) was notified on office notice board for inviting objections. M.P. State Road Transport Corporation filed formal objections. He was granted stage carriage permit vide order dated 27-8-1997 (Vide Annexure P/2) for a...
Devendra Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(1)MPLJ529
ORDERDeepak Misra, J.1. Invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') the petitioner has assailed the order dated 14-8-1996 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Berasia, Bhopal which has been affirmed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Criminal Revision No. 138/96 whereby the prayer of the petitioner to treat him as a juvenile has been refused. It is also worth mentioning here that the petitioner has also questioned the propriety of the order dated 2-1-1997 passed by the IX Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal (the learned trial Judge) wherein he has declined to entertain the prayer of the petitioner for treating him as a juvenile.2. The facts as have been undraped in the petition are that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in connection with a crime instituted for offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 324/149 of Indian Penal Code. He wa...
Hindustan Mills and Electricals Stores Vs. Kedia Distillery Limited an ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1998
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas66(MP); 1998(2)MPLJ325
Dipak Misra, J. 1. Invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this court under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), the complainant-petitioner assails the correctness of the order dated January 7, 1997, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Raipur, in Criminal Case No. 184 of 1996 whereby he has rejected the complaint of the petitioner on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.2. Bereft of unnecessary details the factual matrix as has been portrayed in the petition is that the petitioner is a duly registered partnership firm having its head office at Ganjapada, Raipur. Non-applicant No. 1 is a public limited company and is represented by one of its directors who is also the vice-president of the company. Non-applicant No. 2 is another director of the company. According to the petitioner, on a request being made by the non-applicants the applicant supplied mechanical equipment and electrical goods on credit a...
Tariq Riyaz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ4437
Dipak Misra, J.1. The pivotal question that falls for determination in this revision is whether the learned first Additional Sessions,' Bhopal is justified in affirming the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal in Criminal Case No. 5495/96 whereby an application preferred by the Public Prosecutor under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') was rejected.2. Shorn of unnecessary details the facts leading to filing of the present revision are that on 20-6-96 the informant, a constable in the Traffic Police, was assigned to perform his duties near the crossing of Bhopal Talkies and when the petitioner tried to cross the road ignoring the red light signal he was detained by the informant. According to the prosecution there was a scuffle between the petitioner and the informant and in quite promptitude an FIR was lodged by the informant. After the criminal law was set in motion the investigating agency conducted investiga...
Babulal Tiwari and anr. Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1998
Reported in: 1999ACJ968
S.K. Dubey, J.1. Appellants are the claimants, who have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded in Claim Case No. 42 of 1994 vide award dated 30.8.1996 passed by First Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Seoni.2. It is not in dispute that the deceased Pitambar Tiwari, aged 23 years, was a boxer of national level, who died in motor accident caused by stage carriage bus No. MP-07-F-0279 driven by respondent No. 2, during the course of employment with respondent No. 1, in the intervening night of 27 and 28.7.1994. The Tribunal held that the accident was caused due to the sole negligence of the driver of the bus, as the bus dashed the motor cycle of the deceased. The Tribunal also found that the deceased was a boxer of national level and was also a coach. But, as the deceased was working on daily wages as a pump attendant in the Municipal Corporation at Jabalpur and that work was not regular, assessed monthly dependency at Rs. 400, i.e., yearly Rs. 4,800 wherein m...
Dr. Lakhan Tiwari Vs. Smt. Preeti
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-1998
Reported in: I(1999)DMC149
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed by the husband against the judgment dated 20.12.1996 passed by the District Judge, Chhatarpur in C.S. No. 36-A/96 whereby his petition against the respondent/wife for grant of a decree of divorce has been dismissed.2. The appellant/husband is a doctor who earlier practised at Bijawar and is now practising at Chhatarpur. He was married to the respondent on 28.6.1993 at Chhatarpur. The wife is daughter of B.P. Pandey (PW 2) who retired as Principal of a reputed College.3. According to the husband's case, the parties lived together at Bijawar for few days after marriage. Then the couple shifted in August, 1993 to Chhatarpur where the husband has opened a private clinic for his practice. The allegation of the husband is that the wife used to frequently visit her parents at Chhatarpur without his permission and thus used to deprive him of her company. It is stated that from November, 1993 the wife...
Sakinabai Vs. Fakruddin
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-1998
Reported in: II(1999)DMC576
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. Applicant is the former wife of the non-applicant who both are Mohammedans. It is not disputed that the applicant has been divorced by the non- applicant on 3.3.1983. The applicant moved an application under Section 125, Cr. P.C. before A.C.J.M., Barwani, against the non-applicant for maintenance. While the application was still pending, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 came into force w.e.f. 19.3.1986. The non-applicant/husband thereupon made an application to the Magistrate for closure of the case. His application was rejected by the Magistrate by order dated 30.10.1986. However, in revision, the learned A.S.J., Barwani, by the order impugned has set aside the order and allowed the said application of the non-applicant/husband.2. Section 7 of the Act of 1986 reads as follows :'7. Transitional provisions-Every application by a divorced woman under Section 125 or under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), pend...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »