Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
Ramadhar Sharma Vs. Sewaram S/O Shriram and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ461
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by an order dated 7-12-1996 passed by the First Appellate Court whereunder allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of the trial Court, rejecting the application filed by the plaintiffs under Order 22, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code seeking to bring on record the heirs and legal representatives of Mataprasad, the defendant No. 1 the said application has been granted, the proposed defendant has now approached this Court seeking reversal of the impugned order and restoration of the order of the trial Court.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the defendant-applicant as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondents and have also carefully perused the record.3. The facts in brief, shorn of details and necessary for disposal of this case lie in a narrow compass. The suit giving rise to this revision had been filed by the plaintiff-respondents Nos. 1 to 6 against Mataprasad, who was impleaded as defendant No. 1 and th...
Devi Singh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3045
Rajeev Gupta, J. 1. The appellants, in all eight in number, have preferred this appeal against the impugned judgment dated 21-12-1987, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai, District Sagarin S.T.No. 117/87, whereby the appellants stand convicted under Sections 148, 302/149 0000appellant No. 7 Anirudh Singh under Section 302 simpliciter) and Sections 324/149, of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC), with sentences of rigorous imprisonment for 1 year, imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for 1 year each respectively.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that:--(A) Accused Devi Singh, who was issueless, had asked Khoob Singh (since deceased) and his brother Shivraj, who were residents of a village in Tehsil Sironj, to come and settle down in his village Dhana. Accused-Devi Singh also offered Khoob Singh and Shivraj his agricultural land situated in village Dhana for cultivation and persuaded them to sell their agricultural land situated in Tehsil Sironj. Accused-Devi...
E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Siara (Smt.) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-1998
Reported in: [1999(81)FLR122]; (1999)IILLJ394MP
J.G. Chitre, J.1. The appellant is hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by Employees' State Insurance Court in Case No. 35/1993. A petition was moved by one Siara w/o Siraj Mohd. r/o 130, Labour Colony, Mandsaur in the E.S.I. Court, Mandsaur for getting benefit of extended sickness as she was working in Jyoti Slate Pen Works, Mandsaur as she was suffering from silicosis. The record shows that said Siara was working in the said factory from 1980 to July 2, 1992 and during that period she contracted 'silicosis'. The record further shows that she was registered at S.No. 10338150 with E.S.I. Corporation through Jyoti Slate Pen Works, Mandsaur vide code, No. 18-8401-42.2. On May 20, 1993 Respondent No.1 Siara submitted an application vide form No. 16-A and informed the authority about her contacting silicosis. Said form and information was forwarded by Jyoti Slate Pen Works to the concerned officials of E.S.I. Corporation on May 25, 1993 vi...
Jagdishprasad Vishvakarma Vs. Smt. Dropatibai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)MPLJ683
A.R. Tiwari, J.1. 'No light', wrote Milton in Paradise Lost 'but rather darkness visible'. But Courts of justice, determined to secure harmony and spurn antinomy, search 'light' in lexicon of law to be able to say 'no darkness, but only light visible'. In this epicerastic exercise, Courts have to remember that law has to enchisel 'flaw' and ensure 'flow' in doctrinal direction. The inbred question is whether First Appellate Court has done the right thing?2. The landlord has filed this second appeal Under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 29-9-1994, rendered by III Additional District Judge, Indore, in Civil Regular Appeal No. 4-A/93, thereby dislodging and demolishing the judgment and decree of eviction, passed Under Section 12(1)(e) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), from the tenanted accommodation comprised of House No. 2, Murai Mohilla, Street No. 3, Sanyogitaganj, Indore, occupied by the tenant at month...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›