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.
Cox Distillery and anr. Vs. Mcdowell and Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1999
Reported in: AIR1999MP118; 2000(1)MPLJ33
R.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dt. 2-7-1997 of District Judge, Raipur passed in Civil Suit No. 9B/1996 on an application for injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. prohibiting the appellants from manufacturing, marketing, using, transporting and selling their Whisky under the brand name of 'COX DIPLOMAT PREMIUM WHISKY.'2. The respondents/plaintiff manufactures and sells Whisky under the registered trade mark 'Diplomat' as its brand. Its label and logo are also registered with the Registrar under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, since 1962.The defendants have started distilling Whisky and labelling it under the name and style of 'COX DIPLOMAT WHISKY' their trade name and label are not registered with the registrar. The defendants/appellants claim to have moved the Registrar for registration of the same under the Trade and Merchandise Act. According to the plaintiffs the label and logo of the defendant's Whisky bottle is deceptively similar...
Devilal S/O Lalchand Vyas Vs. Smt. Narmadabai D/O Badrilal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ80
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.Shri Kutumbule for appellant.1. Perused the certified copy of the order as well as the record. It has been clearly mentioned by the learned Judge in her order that the appellant did not give true description of the property which he is owning and possessing. It has been pointed out that when the present suit was filed in the year 1991, the appellant claimed that he happened to be an indigent person, however, he was having sufficient money to purchase a house in the year 1994. The learned Judge has also mentioned that the Patwari who visited the house of the appellant for the purpose of making the enquiry of the property owned and possessed by the appellant reported that he found that appellant was having movable property worth Rs. 3,245/-. Apart from that, it has been also mentioned in the judgment that the appellant is residing as tenant in the house of his own wife by paying Rs. 300/- P.M. to her. It has also come on the record that appellant had gone to Saudi Ara...
Kandhilal Patel and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1999
Reported in: AIR1999MP137
ORDERR.S. Garg, J.1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek to challenge the correctness, validity and propriety of the Order dated 28-10-98 passed inRevision Case No. 460/A-89/97-98 by the learned Addl. Commissioner, Jabalpur, reversing the Order dated 29-6-98 passed in Case No. 8B-121-97-98 by the learned Addl. Collector, Jabalpur.2. Brief facts necessary for disposal (if the present petition are that the respondent No. 4, elected Sarpanch had faced a no-confidence motion; a meeting for consideration of said no-confidence motion was convened on 13-2-98. Proper notices were issued to all the 12 Panchas, including Sarpanch constituting the Panchayat. On 13-2-98, in presence of all the members constituting the Panchayat, the motion was considered. 9 Panchas voted in favour of the motion, while the respondent No. 4, 5 and 6 voted against the motion. It is noteworthy that instead of going for the secret ballot, the Panchas were asked to show ...
Tej Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1999
Reported in: I(1999)DMC651
Shambhoo Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed by the accused against the judgment and order dated 8.1.1988 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Shajapur, in S.T. 144/87 whereby he was convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.2. It was not in dispute that the deceased Suntibai was married to the appellant 6-7 years before the incident. Her dead-body was found in a well, in the viscinity of the house of appellant.3. The prosecution case, in brief, was that the appellant used to beat his wife Suntibai, therefore, she left his house and went to her parent's house at village Sapkheda, 3 kms. away from Shajapur, on Wednesday. On Sunday, 22.6.1987 her father Ramsingh (PW1) and mother Bhavarbai (PW 3) brought her from their house and left her in the house of the appellant in Shajapur. The deceased lodged report Ex. P7 that she was beaten by her husband. On the next day her dead-body was found in well. On report, S.H.O. Shri B.S. Kang (PW 6) went to the well and recovered the dea...
Azad Singh S/O Lokman Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ704
R.P. Gupta, J.1. The appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. 38/87 by judgment dated 1-2-1989 of Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment. The charge found established against him is that he committed murder of his wife Smt. Babitabai on 23-12-1986 at about 3-45 p.m. by giving blows to her with a Gadasa and caused 3 injuries on various parts of the body including neck and cut vital parts resulting in her death.2. The finding of the trial court is mainly based on the testimony of PW 8 Halkibai, PW 9 Shantibai, PW 10 Santosh, brother of the deceased aged about 10 years, and PW 11 Motilal father of the deceased who lodged the F.I.R.. The murder was committed in the house of Motilal where the deceased was at the relevant time and where the accused had gone that day. Babita died at the spot at once as a result of the injuries. PW 8 and PW 9 asserted having seen the accused striking the deceased with Gadasa while PW 10 on...
Azad Singh S/O Lokman Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4816
R.P. Gupta, J.1. The appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. 38/87 by judgment dated 1-2-89 of Addl. Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur Under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The charge found established against him is that he committed murder of his wife Smt. Babitabai on 23-12-86 at about 3-45 p.m. by giving blows to her with a Gadasa and caused 3 injuries on various parts of the body including neck and cut vital parts resulting in her death.2. The finding of the trial Court is mainly based on the testimony of PW. 8 Halkibai, P.W. 9 Shantibai, PW. 10 Santosh, brother of the deceased aged about 10years and P.W. 11 Motilal father of the deceased who lodged the FIR. The murder was committed in the house of Motilal where the deceased was at the relevant time and where the accused had gone that day. Babita died at the spot at once as a result of the injuries. P.W. 8 and P.W. 9 asserted having seen the accused striking the deceased with Gadasa while PW. 10 only said that the ...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Prakash JaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ608; 1999(1)MPLJ25
V.K. Agarwal, J.1. The appellant insurer has preferred this miscellaneous appeal against the award dated 28.1.1994 in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 30 of 1990 by Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Khairagarh-link-at-Kawardha, whereby compensation of Rs. 8,400 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum has been awarded to claimant-respondent No. 1, Prakash Jain.2. Undisputed facts are that the claimant Prakash Jain was posted as Police Constable at Police Station, Chilphi. On 31.7.90 at about 7.30 a.m., he intended going to Kawardha. Truck No. MKK 5224, which was going from Jabalpur to Raipur came there. The claimant boarded the truck. The said truck dashed against a tanker and met with an accident. Claimant Prakash Jain was injured in the said accident. The said truck was owned by the respondent No. 2 Kochar Saw Mills and was driven by respondent No. 3 Devajee at the time of the accident.3. The claimant/injured Prakash Jain filed a claim petition under Section 166 of t...
Balkrishan and anr. Vs. MohsIn Bhai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1999
Reported in: AIR1999MP86; 1999(2)MPLJ31
N.K. Jain, J.1. This Second Appeal, under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, arises out of the judgment and decree dated 1-9-78 of the Court of Additional District Judge, Neemuch, in Civil First Appeal No. 19-A/75, rendered in affirmance of the judgment and decree dated 8-1-76 passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Class II, Jawad in Civil Suit No. 1-A/69 decreeing suit for the respondent-plaintiffs for redemption of mortgage.2. The dispute relate to agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos. 1817, 1818, 1819, 1820, 1822, 1823, 1824, 1825, 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830 and 1841; total area 8.163 Hectres, situated at Village Athana, Tehsil Jawad, District Mandsaur. Village Athana was a 'Jagir' village of erstwhile Gwalior State which subsequently stood merged in the State of Madhya Bharat. The lands in suit were held by late Yusuf Ali as tenant of 'Jagirdar'. The lands were mortgaged by late Yusuf Ali by way of usufructuary mortgage with Shankarlal, the father of respondents Nos. 1 to ...
Chhotekhan Vs. Rajeshkumar Agrawal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1999
Reported in: II(2000)ACC289; 2001ACJ228; (1999)IILLJ181MP; 1999(2)MPLJ75
1. Perused the certified copy of the impugned award. In paragraph 4 the Commissioner has pointed out that one licence D-4 was produced on the record and in that context one witness named Jagdish who happens to be Dist. Transport Officer working at Jaipur has been examined. The Commissioner pointed out in the judgment in context with the evidence of Jagdish that licence D-4 was a Forged document, as the series was not licensed by his office. It has also come in his evidence that said document was having some scorings. The judgment further shows that an objection was raised by the insurance company pointing out that deceased was not holding a valid driving licence when he drove the vehicle in question. When that was so it was incumbent on the appellants to adduce sufficient evidence for the purpose of proving that the deceased was holding a valid license. When Jagdish was examined by insurance company, it was necessary for appellants to prove that the deceased was asked by his employer t...
Munni Begam Vs. Abdul Satar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1999
Reported in: II(2001)DMC596
S.S. Jha, J. 1. Both these revisions have been referred by the learned Single Judge to determine the question whether the maintenance granted to a Muslim wife under the provisions of Sections 125 to 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') can be claimed after the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') came into force 2. The Act was brought into force by Act No. 25 of 1986 after the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, AIR 1985 SC 945. The Supreme Court in this case held that a Muslim woman is entitled to the provisions of Section 125 of the Code. The decision led to some controversy in relation to the obligation of Muslim husband to pay maintenance to the divorced wife. Therefore, the Act was brought into force whereby it was provided that a Muslim divorced woman shall be entitled to a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance within the period of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »