Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Pradeep Kumar Agarwal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-1998
Reported in: AIR1999MP65; 1998(2)MPLJ718
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J. 1. A counter-affidavit/return has been filed in this case on behalf of the respondent on 5-8-1998. Copy of the aforesaid return had been supplied to the learned counsel for thepetitioner on 27-8-1998.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner does not propose to file any rejoinder-affidavit denying or controverting the assertions made in the aforesaid return/counter-affidavit.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel representing the respondents.Perused the record.1-A. The facts in brief shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this case lie in a narrow compass. It is not in dispute that the telephone connection number 429208, was provided to Pradeep Kumar Agarwal, the petitioner. He is the subscriber so far as this telephone connection is concerned. Another telephone connection being No. 320895, has been provided to Jugal Kishore Agarwal. This subscriber however, is the brother of the petitione...
Rameshchandra Babulalji Shrivastav Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ571
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. Heard Shri Jaishingh, counsel for the petitioner and Shri Prakash Verma, Dy. G. A. for respondent.The small point is to be decided in this revision petition and, therefore, on the request of counsel appearing for the litigating parties, this revision petition is being decided finally at this stage.2. The petitioner has been convicted by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandsaur for offence punishable under Section 409 Indian Penal Code for alleged embezzlement of amount the tune of Rs. 31,240.70 ps. He has been sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 30,000/- as learned Magistrate found him guilty for offence under Section 409 Indian Penal Code. The petitioner preferred an appeal in the Sessions Court, Mandsaur challenging the correctness, propriety and legality of that order of conviction and sentence. During the pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner moved an application for suspension of sentence. Learned 3rd A.S.J,. Mandsaur suspended the...
indo-unique Flame Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ17
ORDERA.K. Mathur, C.J.1. All these L.P.As. and Writ Petitions involve common question of law and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. These cases are classified into two categories; (i) L.P.As. filed by private petitioners against the order dated 21-22/9/95, Annexure-P-5 in W.P. No. 3608/96 and (ii) Writ Petitions filed by private parties and South Eastern Coalfields. In the petitions, filed by the South Eastern Coalfields, challenge is to the issue of letter by the Mining Engineer for recovery of interest on the amount of enhanced rate of royalty. Therefore, these cases are clubbed together and are disposed of by this common order.3. Short history of these cases is that initially a batch of petitions was filed before this Court challenging the Notification dated 1-8-1991 whereby the Central Government enhanced the rate of royalty from Rs. 6.50 to Rs. 120.00 per metric Ton. This Court declared the aforesaid notification as ultra vires and quashed it. Aggrieved...
Gusai Vs. Smt. Banoobai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-1998
Reported in: I(1999)DMC454
S.B. Sakrikar, J.1. Applicant-husband had directed this petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code for quashing of the orders dated 19.8.1996 and 13.3.1997 respectively rendered by JMFC, Kanod in Misc. Criminal Case No. 25/91 and ASJ Kannod in Criminal Case No. 5/97.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the applicant and non-applicant No. 1 are the husband and wife. Non-applicant No. 2 is the son and non-applicant No. 3 is the daughter of the parties. Non-applicant No. 1 Smt. Banoobai filed petition before the JMFC Kannod under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code for grant of maintenance to herself and minor son and daughter living with non-applicant No. 1. In the application it is stated that father of the applicant, after the birth of non-applicant No. 3 Kshmabai, ill-treated non-applicant No. 1 and turned her out along with minor children from the matrimonial home and, thereafter, applicant did not even care for their maintenance or for taking them back. It is a...
Sajjan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ4073
D.P. Wadhwa, J.1. Sajjan Singh (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 137/97), Dule Singh and Meharban Singh (appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 138/97) are aggrieved by judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court convicting them for offences under Sections 302/149, Indian Penal Code 'IPC for short) and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Originally before the Sessions Court, there were 11 accused being tried including the appellants. Two of the accused were also charged for offence under Section 404, IPC. After the conclusion of the trial, Sessions Judge acquitted Banesingh and convicted rest of the 10 sentencing each of them to life imprisonment. These 10 went in appeal before the High Court. State also filed appeal against the acquittal of Banesingh. Appeals were heard by a Division Bench comprising of Shukla and Chitre, JJ. Both the Judges upheld the acquittal of Banesingh and dismissed the appeal filed by the State. So far as the 10 appellants were concerned, the Judges we...
Siddhartha Tubes Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(63)ECC24
ORDERDeepak Verma, J.1. The matter had come up for consideration before this Court on 2.4.1998. On the said date after hearing the counsel for parties a direction was given that interim relief as prayed for by the petitioners would continue till 15.7.1998. Meanwhile both parties were directed to approach the Supreme Court and obtain appropriate orders, failing which the petition was directed to be listed for final hearing on 20th July, 1998.2. It appears that the petitioners were not able to obtain orders of stay for the Supreme Court. They accordingly filed an application I.A. No. 3871/98 for extension of the stay granted in their favour after 15.7.1998. The said application was rejected by this Court on 30.7.1998 as the petitioners were not able to obtain stay order from the Supreme Court despite the SLP being filed on 13.7.98. The learned Counsel appearing for petitioners reiterated the prayer for grant of time on the pretext that the result of the SLP is not yet known. The very fac...
Bank of India Vs. Kalptaru Vanika, Bhopal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-1998
Reported in: AIR1999MP100; 1998(2)MPLJ517
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondents.2. The petitioner-Bank had issued a recovery-certificate contemplated under Section 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Lok Dhan (Shodhya Rashiyon Ki Vasuli) Adhmiyam, 1987, against (1) M/s. Kalplaru Vanika, a Partnership Firm as well as (2) Mrs. Praveen Malik, Partner, (3) Mrs. Reeni Malik, (4) Mrs. Sarita Tondon, and (4) Mr. Ramakant Ram, who were its partners, for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 22,80,797/- along with an interest calculated at the rate of 18.25 per cent. In the aforesaid recovery-certificate it had also been indicated that Mr. Subhash Malik, the present respondent No. 6, was the guarantor for securing the payment due to the Bank. The afore-said recovery, certificate was issued on 8-10-1996. 3. Pursuant to the recovery-certificate indicated hereinabbve, proceedings for the recovery of the amount mentioned therein were initiated under the...
State of M.P. Vs. Rammi @ Rameshwar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ391
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Brutal murder committed in broad day light in a running bus in presence of driver, conductor and passengers escaped unpunished by the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge against which the State in appeal and the complainant in revision (Cr. Revision No. 620/86) have approached this Court. Both the cases are being decided by this common judgment.2. There was bitter enmity between the three accused persons on one side and the deceased on the other. Deceased Sardar Singh, his brother Shyam Singh (PW 3) and Ramdulare (PW 9) were accused of murdering Channa Babu, real brother of accused Rammi and Chhinga. The deceased and the other abovementioned accused in that case were acquitted against which an appeal in the High Court was pending.3. According to the case of the prosecution, on 20-7-1985, deceased Sardar Singh who was a Home Guard in his dress was travelling in a bus of M.P.S.R.T.C. from Babai. The three accused persons boarded the bus at...
B.R. Nikunj Vs. VipIn Tiwari
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4223
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. An act of a lawyer attacking the reputation and character of a Judge is as grave an offence worthy of condemnation as of a priest in a temple defacing and defiling the deity installed in it, because by such act he not only destroys the very institution from which he derives status and sustenance but does greater general damage by shaking faith of the devotees and hurting the feelings and sentiments of the worshippers who through his mediation and assistance seek spiritual gain and contentment.2. These introductory comments are called for on the facts which have been brought to the notice of this Court by a reference under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') made by the Presiding Judge of the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate of Balodabazar District Raipur against the contemner who is a practising lawyer there.3. It is not in dispute that the Presiding Judge B.R. Nikunj, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›