Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Bhagwandas Harprasad Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ472
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Inspector, Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, dated 16-6-1997 requiring the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1014/97 to deposit an amount of Rs. 20,000/- for having employed a child labourer and the order dated 12-6- 1997 passed by the same Authority requiring the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 31 of 1998 to deposit an amount of Rs. 40,000/- for having employed two child labourers in violation of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide its Judgment and order in Writ Petition (C) No. 465 of 1986, decided on 10-12-1996, M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors., they have now approached this Court seeking redress praying for quashing of the aforesaid orders.2. The respondent-Authority has filed separate counter- affidavits in opposition to each of the aforesaid writ petitions.3. A large number of writ petitions have been filed challenging similar orders passed by the Inspector, appoint...
Anita Sonkar Vs. Babloo Sonkar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1998
Reported in: II(1999)DMC3
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 5th December, 1986 passed by the IV Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur in C.S. No. 88A/95 dismissing the petition filed by the appellant/wife for grant of a decree of divorce against the husband on' the alleged ground of cruelty.2. The parties belong to Sonkar community. They were married on 18.2.1992. In the divorce petition pleading cruelty on several grounds, inter alia, it was stated that under the influence of liquor the respondent/husband and his relations Leelabai Raju, Sitaram and Seema beat the wife on 23.3.1995 and attacked her with weapons like sword and knife. It is alleged that the husband also tried to pour kerosene oil on her. Somehow she could escape and rush to the nearby telephone booth. She also reported the matter to police station specially set up for offences against women at Bilaspur.3. The wife entered the witness box as PW1 and in her deposition stated that...
Shyamlal Vs. Lau Kush Ram Lakhan Pandey and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ260
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') the complainant-petitioner calls in question the pregnability of the order dated 16-1-1997 passed by the learned Special Judge, Satna, whereby he has dismissed the complaint of the petitioner under Section 203 of the Code.2. The facts as have been uncurtained are that the petitioner is in possession in respect of the land measuring 2 Acres, situate at Bari Khurd, Distt. Satna. It is stated in the petition that the petitioner belongs to 'Chamar' community. The non-applicants, who are 'Brahmins' with the intention and precalculated plan, endeavoured to take possession of the land belonging to the petitioner. The non-applicant No. 1 initiated a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code forming the subject matter of criminal Case No. 17/89 in the Court of City Magistrate, Satna in the year 1989 in which the non-applicant No. 1 became unsuccessfu...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Kusum Rani Chowdhary
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-06-1998
Reported in: [1999]239ITR139(MP)
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur, under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, and the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this court :'Whether, the Tribunal was right in holding that on an interpretation of the terms of the adoption deed and the provisions of the Hindu law the deceased, Komal Chand, did not acquire any interest in the property of Nathu Ram at the time of adoption or later on the death of Nathu Ram ?'2. Brief facts giving rise to this reference are that Komal Chand died on December 10, 1975. He was adopted by Nathu Ram on August 30, 1968, by a registered adoption deed. Nathuram also died on May 27, 1974, leaving behind his widow, Smt. Maharani, and the adopted son, Komal Chand. In the adoption deed dated August 30, 1968, it was stipulated that the property of Nathuram would pass to Komal Chand only on the death of Nathu Ram and his wife, Smt. Maharani. The question aro...
Harishankar Patel Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ16
C.K. Prasad, J.1. Appellant, the writ petitioner being aggrieved by order dated 20-2-1998 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4049/95 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has preferred this appeal under Clause X of Letters Patent of the Court. By the said order, learned Single Judge has dismissed his writ petition.2. Appellant was a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Moha Putka and by show-cause notice dated 19-4-1995 (Annexure P/4 of the Writ Petition) he was asked to show cause as to why he be not removed from the office of the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. Later on, by order dated 17-7-1995, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 39(1 )(b) of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, he was put under suspension with immediate effect. Appellant challenged the same and prayed for quashing of the aforesaid orders by filing a writ petition which as stated earlier, has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge. It is relevant here to state that wh...
Rajendra Kumar Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1998
Reported in: 2000(3)MPHT172
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. 'Awake, Arise, 'O' Partha', Lord Krishna thus commanded Arjun, his chosen 'Sakha' and dearest disciple, during the war of Mahabharata to carry on the crusade against the 'Adharma'. Many a determined and dedicated crusaders have selflessly fought against evil being inspired by their 'Gums', enthused by their self-protested ideals and sometimes emboldened by the mandate of the majesty of law which has to rule supreme in every circumstance and on each occasion performing its noble duty of a great leveller. With the aforesaid attitude, tenacity, devotion and consecration respondent Nos. 3 and 4, namely, the Director General, Special Police Establishment and the Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment have drawn an FIR contained in 'Annexure P-26' to this Writ Petition against the present petitioner, the erstwhile Minister of Housing and Environment, Department of State of Madhya Pradesh for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) read wit...
Dilip Singh Mandloi Vs. Premchand Gendalal Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ451
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. This Miscellaneous Appeal purports to have been filed under Section 32 of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 against order dated 21-1-1994 passed by Ist Additional District Judge, Khandwa, in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 14/92 which confirmed the eviction order of the appellant in favour of the respondent from the residential accommodation as was directed by the Rent Controlling Authority, Khandwa, vide order dated 29-5-1992 in case No. 2-A/90(7) of 1990-91, which was passed under Section 31 of the aforesaid Act.2. The admitted facts are that the concerned residential accommodation was allotted to the tenant/appellant by authorised officer under Section 39(2) of the aforesaid Act. The property belongs to the respondent/landlord. The appellant/tenant was Maleria Officer. The allotment was made to him in the year 1983. He was continuing in possession thereafter as tenant and the relationship of landlord and tenant came into existence through intervening allotment by...
Mohanlal S/O Chunnilal Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)MPLJ638
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. By this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner assails and challenges the correctness, validity and propriety of the Orders dated 1-7-1985 (Annexure P-14), passed by Sub-Divisional Officer and Order dated 5-5-1987 (Annexure P.13), passed by the Collector, as an Appellate Authority.2(i) The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are, that on 23-10-1969, by a registered sale, certain agricultural lands were sold by Respondent No. 5-Rama to the present petitioner for a consideration of Rs. 7,500/- and, yet, by another registered sale dated 17-9-1970, for a consideration of Rs. 2,500/-, some more land was sold by Respondent No. 5 in favour of the petitioner.(ii) The Respondent No. 5-Rama, moved an application before the Debt Relief Court, which was registered as case No. 36/1975. The Presiding Officer of the said Court, by his order dated 8-7-1976 (Annexure P-4) held that it was not a loan or mortgage transaction, but, was a out-r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›