Madhya Pradesh Court October 1999 Judgments
Sarju Prasad Patel Vs. Nanakchand and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT531
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal under Section 100 C.P.C.. The following substantial question of law was formulated by the order dated 22-7-1993 at the time of admission of the appeal :'Whether letting out of residential accommodation by the plaintiff shortly before the institution of the suit negatived the plaintiffs' suit for bonafide residence of the suit accommodation under Section 12 (1) (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961'.2. The facts relevant for the decision of the question referred above are that the defendant is tenant of the plaintiffs for the last 35 years at a monthly rent of Rs. 40/- on the ground floor of the house. The plaintiffs are in occupation of the first floor. Kailash Srivastava was also the tenant of the plaintiffs in this house. He was having one room on the first floor, one room on the ground floor and some other accommodation. The plaintiffs filed a suit for eviction against him on the ground provided in Section 12 (1) (e) of ...
Tag this Judgment!Ravi Shanker Kaushal Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT674
ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for quashing of the show cause notice dated 29-11-1994 (Annexure K) whereby the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why penalty of removal from service under regulation 39 (f) of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960 be not imposed against him.2. Short facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner claiming to be the member of the Scheduled Tribe, belonging to the Lodhi caste, applied for his appointment to the respondent-Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). By order dated 29- 8-1989 (Annexure B) he was appointed as Peon on probation for a period of six months. As the confirmation of the petitioner was being delayed, even after expiry of the period of probation, he filed an application before the Assistant Labour Commissioner for conciliation and for referen...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)MPHT429
ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. By this writ petition, filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent No. 1 the State Government to appoint the petitioner as Managing Director of M.P. State Seed & Farm Development Corporation in terms of the recommendation of the Selection Committee. Further prayer made by the petitioner is to quash the order dated 2-4-1997 (Annexure P-13) of the State Govt. whereby respondent No. 3 has been appointed as the Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation.2. Facts necessary for the decision of the present writ petition are that the State Govt. issued an advertisement, which was published in the daily news paper M.P. Chronicle on 18-2-1995, inviting applications for the appointment to the post of Managing Director of M.P. Seed & Farm Development Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'. A Selection Committee was constituted for making recommen...
Tag this Judgment!R.P. Tiwari Vs. Smt. Soluchna Choudhary
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT481
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is defendant's second appeal under Section 100 C.P.C.. The substantial questions of law which were formulated at the time of admission of this appeal by the order dated 13-9-1995, are as under :--(1) 'Have the two Courts below erred in decreeing the claim of the plaintiff under Section 12 (1) (f) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 for the bonafide requirement of business of the husband of the plaintiff and her two sons, who were allegedly minor on the date of filing of the suit.'(2) 'Have the two Courts below erred in holding that the vendor, who sold the suit house to her, had valid title on the house in question'.2. There are concurrent findings of fact of the trial Court and the first appellate Court that the defendant was tenant of Mukund Das in the suit accommodation house No. 738 block No. 12, Wright Town (Narsinghdas Building), Jabalpur, at a monthly rent of Rs. 10/- since 1956. He was paying rent to Mukund Das. The plaintiff has purchased this hou...
Tag this Judgment!Madhukar Rao Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)MPHT445; 2000(1)MPLJ289
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. A common order is being passed in this petition with a batch of petitions W.P. No. 1189/98 (Amar Chand Jain and Anr. v. The State of M.P.), W.P. No. 1236/98 (Kripa Shankar Singh v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. No. 3769/97 (Umashankar Bhargava v. State of M.P. and Ors.) as common question of general importance arises for decision.2. The question raised is whether as a result of deletion of Sub-section (2) of Section 50 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and as an effect of the provisions of Section 39(1)(d) of the said Act, there exists no power with the Authorities under the Act of the Code to release any vehicle used in the course of alleged commission of an offence under the Act. Learned Single Judge I.P. Rao (as he then was) in State of M.P. v. Syed Yahya Ali (1995 MPLJ 791) and a Division Bench at Gwalior consisting of Justice S. Dwivedi and Justice S.S. Jha in its judgment in L.P.A. 152/99 (State of M.P. v. Asad Amin) decided on 8-5-96 have take...
Tag this Judgment!Gurumukh Das Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2419
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 29-12-1989 passed in Cr. Revision No. 79/89 by First Additional Sessions Judge, Umaria, district Shahdol setting aside the acquittal judgment of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Umaria in Cr. Case No. 1083/84, decided on 3-2-69. By this impugned order the Additional Sessions Judge, set aside the acquittal and remanded the case back to the Chief Judicial Magistrate for its re-decision in accordance with law for the reasons discussed in the impugned order.2. The circumstances in which this revision was taken up by the Additional Sessions Judge were like this that after the acquittal judgment by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the Sessions Judge, Shahdol inspected the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and found gross irregularities in disposal of this case, finding that there was sufficient overwhelming material to convict the accused and no material to raise any doubt on any point against the prosecution. The accused had been pros...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Siya Devi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ155; 2000(2)MPLJ66
V.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed against the award dated 14.9.1994 in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 24 of 1991 by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, District Surguja.2. Deceased Sitaram was a driver employed by respondent No. 7 Walia Transport Company. On the date of accident, i.e., on 12.3.1991 Sitaram was taking the truck bearing registration No. DL-1-G-0160 belonging to respondent No. 7 to Korba. Siyaram, AW 2, was the khalasi, who was also travelling in the said truck. The respondent No. 8 Raj Kumar Patel was driving truck No. URH 9617 which was owned by respondent No. 9 Patel Goods Carrier and was insured by the appellant New India Assurance Co. Ltd. There was a collision between the two trucks, i.e., one being driven by deceased Sitaram and another being driven by the respondent No. 8 Raj Kumar Patel. As a result of the said accident, Sitaram sustained serious injuries. He was treated first at hospital at Renuko...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Vs. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ1413; [2000(85)FLR754]; (2000)IIILLJ553MP
ORDERShambhoo Singh, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated April 9, 1999 passed in W.C.C. 112/88 by Commissioner Workmen's Compensation, Indore. In this case the petitioner-applicant filed the claim case averring that he was engaged by the non-applicant as a labourer and while going down in the well with the help of rope which broke and he fell down in the well and sustained injuries. He claimed compensation of Rs. 20,000/-. The non-applicant resisted the claim. The Commissioner awarded Rs. 25,327.50 with interest at the rate of Rs. 6% per annum as compensation and also imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000/-. However, the Commissioner vide order dated April 9, 1999 directed the non-applicant to deposit Rs. 25,387.50 with interest to be paid to the petitioner and further directed that the penalty amount of Rs. 10,000/- be credited to the Government in view of Section 4A(3-A) Workmen's Compensation Act (for short 'the Act'). The petitioner is challenging this direction...
Tag this Judgment!Prakashchand Basantkumar Vs. Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1999
Reported in: [2000]118STC52(MP)
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashing the impugned review order dated March 3, 1992 (annexure F) and also the notice of demand dated May 1, 1992 (annexure G) and also praying for restoration of the order dated October 25, 1991 (annexure C) which was passed by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P., Indore, following the decision of Board of Revenue dated August 27, 1990 (annexure D).2. In short the case of the petitioner in this petition is that the petitioner has set up an oil mill at Bhikangaon which was a new industrial unit, The petitioner was exempted from payment of entry tax for the period of 5 years from the date of first purchase of oil-seeds and other raw materials for consumption in the manufacture of oil and oil-cake. The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Khargone (respondent No. 2) passed an assessment order under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (for short 'th...
Tag this Judgment!Ex Sepoy Rajesh Kumar Upadhyay Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)MPHT1
ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for quashing of the order dated 18-3-1997 (Annexure P-2) as also the order dated 5-4-1999 (Annexure P-4) whereby the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of disability pension has been rejected.2. Facts necessary for the decision of the present writ petition are that the petitioner was enrolled in the Army in Corps of Electrical and Mechanical Engineers on 27-2-1991. It is his assertion that on successful completion of training at 3 EME Centre at Bhopal and College of Material Management at Jabalpur he was posted as Sepoy (Store Keeper Technical). Petitioner appeared before the Medical Board on 12-3-1996 and it was found that the petitioner was suffering from non organic psychosis. Thereafter a discharge slip was issued to him on 6-4-1996 and from perusal of the discharge slip it is apparent that he was invalidated out of service on account of low medical cate...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »