Madhya Pradesh Court January 1999 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.
Uma Bai and anr. Vs. Pagal Raj Banshi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ745
A.K. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is the misc. appeal directed against the award dated 6.7.1992 given by the II Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur, in Claim Case No. 27 of 1991 whereby the learned Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs. 51,840 to the claimants for the death of deceased Jhaduram.2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 11.2.1991 at about 11 a.m., the deceased Jhaduram was going on his cycle from Pachpedi to the city. When he reached near Shukla Petrol Pump, a truck bearing No. NIT 9016 driven by non-applicant No. 1 Pagal Raj came in a rash and negligent manner from Dhamtari side and it struck against the deceased Jhaduram as a result of which he died on the spot. Therefore, the present claim petition was filed by the father and mother of the deceased.3. It is alleged that the age of the deceased was 17 years, he was doing the job of tailor and earning a sum of Rs. 800 per month. It is alleged that he was also appearing in 10th class examination. It is all...
Kumari Kini Dixit Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-14-1999
Reported in: AIR1999MP258; 2000(1)MPLJ605
ORDERR.S. Garg, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks relief that the respondents be commanded to treat the petitioner qualified as per Rule 2.4.1 of the P.P.T. Rules and the respondents be commanded to grant opportunity to the petitioner to appear in the councilling and she be given admission in P.P.T. course 1998 in the college as per her merits in the list.2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition are; that the petitioner took up her examination for session 1997-98 of 10th class conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education. It appears that she could not clear all the subjects in the first attempt therefore, in Hindi course A she was given compartment. After appearing in the examination the petitioner also took up examination of Pre-Polytechnic test (PPI) 1998 which is in fact a entrance test conducted by the Professional Examination Board, M. P. The petitioner passed in the PPT examination and could secure...
Basant Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-14-1999
Reported in: II(1999)DMC398
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellant Basant has been convicted under Section 498A, Indian Penal Code for treating his wife Jaswantabai with cruelty and he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and to a fine of Rs. 1,000/-.2. Smt. Jaswantabai and appellant Basant have filed a petition stating therein that they want to compromise this matter. Section 498A, IPC is non-compoundable and, therefore, permission to compound the offence cannot be given.3. On a perusal of judgment of the Trial Court it is found that it is wholly unsustainable. The police had filed a charge-sheet under Section 307, IPC against Jaswantabai on the ground that she jumped into the Well with her two minor child ren. She has been acquitted of that charge. In this charge-sheet the husband was also impleaded as accused. The wife has not made any complaint against her husband. She has also not appeared as a witness against him. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence regarding the cruelty to the wife by the ...
Amar Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1999
Reported in: AIR1999MP215; 1999(2)MPLJ337
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 6-8-96 passed in the case taken up by the Collector East Nimar (Khandwa), under suo motu revisional powers, has filed this petition.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that assumption of the jurisdiction by the Collector for setting aside the election of the petitioner is patently illegal because an election held under the provisions of M. P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam 1993 can be set aside only on submission of a duly constituted election petition under Section 122(1) of the Adhiniyam and not otherwise. He submits that the manner in which the jurisdiction has been usurped would clearly show that that the learned Collector either did not try to read the provisions of the laws or did not understand the law in its true perspective.3. Learned counsel for the State submitted that an illegality was brought to the notice of the Collector in accordance with Section 91 of the Adhiniyam read with Rule 5 of the Appeal ...
Khom Bai and ors. Vs. First Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ145
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. The petitioners being aggrieved by the Orders dated 7-8- 1985 (Annexure-A) passed in Execution Case No. 91-A/71 and order dated 15-4-1988 (Annexure-B) passed in Civil Revision No. 48/87 have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. Facts necessary for disposal of the present petition are that certain lands belonged to the petitioners, out of the said area possessed by the petitioners some lands were transferred in favour of the respondent No. 3. Later on a suit was filed by the present petitioner (since deceased) inter alia pleading that the transfer deed was sham and bogus and the same was only for the purposes of the Ceiling Act. The matter ultimately came up to the High Court in Second Appeal No. 425/77. The said appeal was decided by this Court in favour of the petitioner on 12-10-1984. At the time of hearing, it was submitted before the Court that as in the Ceiling Proceedings drawn against the present petitioners particular land w...
Madhya Pradesh State Road Trans. Corpn. and anr. Vs. Priyank
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ701
Shambhoo Singh, J.1. The owner M.P.S.R.T.C. has filed this appeal for reduction of compensation amount awarded to the claimant by Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Barwaha, in Claim Case No. 11 of 1994 passed on 28.11.1997 whereby compensation of Rs. 2,74,905 was awarded.2. The claimant's case was that on 16.8.1993, he boarded bus No. MBH 843 belonging to M.P.S.R.T.C. and driven by non-applicant No. 2 at Barwaha. When this bus stopped at Sanawad for payment of octroi, claimant also alighted from it. When the conductor came after paying octroi and the claimant was boarding the bus, the driver all of a sudden moved the bus. The gate of this bus dashed against the back portion of other bus which was standing nearby and the claimant fell down from the bus and sustained injuries on his head, finger and pelvis. He was taken to Sanawad Hospital and from there he was shifted to Gokuldas Nursing Home, Indore and thereafter to Bombay. It was revealed that he had comminuted fracture of ...
Bhayla and anr. Vs. Abdul Kayum and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ546; AIR1999MP90; 1999(2)MPLJ54
1. Appellants were awarded compensation of Rs. 2,84,0007- with 12% inter-est p.a. from the date of award by MACT, Barwani. But they are claiming interest from the date of claim petition. Are they entitled so as of right and was Tribunal under an obligation to award interest from the date of claim petition. In other words it is their right to claim so and is any corresponding duty cast on Tribunal to award so.2. Appellants' counsel Mr. Rajpal placed reliance on Section 171 of M.V. Act, 1988 in support. He interpreted this provision to suggest that though Tribunal was out of bounds to award interest prior to claim petition, it was under duty to award interest from the date of claim petition.3. The submission seems based on gross misappreciation of the terms of Section 171. The relevant section is reproduced hereunder and reads thus:--'Award of interest where any claim is allowed --Where any Claims Tribunal allows a claim for compensation made under this Act, such Tribunal may direct that...
Ram Swaroop Shakya Vs. Morena Mandal Sahakari Shakkar Karkhana Ltd. an ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ416
S.P. Srivastava, J.1. These Letters Patent Appeals are directed against the orders passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the Writ Petitions, filed by the petitioners/appellants, by a common order. Taking into consideration the fact that the controversy raised in these appeals is identical in nature, these appeals are being disposed of by a common order.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondent, and have carefully perused the record.3. The facts in brief, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of these appeals lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner/appellant, Ramaswaroop Shakya of Writ Petition No. 872 of 1988, giving rise to the Letters Patent Appeal No. 250 of 1996, is an employee of the Morena Mandal Sahakari Sakkar Karkhana Ltd., Kailaras, district Morena, which is a registered society under the M.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. He felt aggrieved by the order passed...
N.G.E.F. Limited, Transformer Division Vs. Raipur Alloys and Steel Lim ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ176
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this appeal preferred under Section 39(l)(iv) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the appellant has called in question the defensibility of the judgment dated 11-10-1996 passed by the learned District Judge, Raipur in Civil Suit No. 63-A/94 whereby he has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 20 of the Act and has taken steps for appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate certain disputes.2. The essential facts which need to be stated for the purpose of present appeal are that the respondent No. 1 instituted the aforesaid Civil Suit under Section 20 of the Act for calling for the agreement and to refer the disputes to an arbitrator. According to the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 it had to purchase certain electrical equipments for establishment of transformer at Raipur. The defendant No. 1, M/s Asea Brown Boveri submitted a quotation for the said items. The items in respect of which the quotation was submitted by the defendant No....
Suman Vyas and ors. Vs. Jagjeet Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ486
B.A. Khan and Shambhoo Singh, JJ.1. One Avnish Kumar Vyas was travelling in a Maruti car which was hit by a truck and he died in the accident. His claimants filed Claim Case No. 25 of 1996 and Additional M.A.C.T., Kukshi, District Dhar, awarded them only Rs. 1,70,000 even though the compensation amount was determined at Rs. 3,12,000. The deduction was made on account of the direction to make lump sum payment to claimants and also because they were receiving pension and insurance amount of the deceased.2. Claimants have filed this appeal for the enhancement of compensation on the ground that Tribunal had applied an inadequate multiplier of 13 and that it could not have reduced the award to Rs. 1,70,000 because of lump sum payment ordered and the pension and insurance amount received by them. According to them age of the deceased was 43 years and multiplier applied should have been 15 instead of 13 as per the Schedule appended to Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act. It is also submitted ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »