Madhya Pradesh Court April 1999 Judgments
Balram S/O Gulab and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ355
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellants Balram and Maharani have been convicted under Sections 306 and 498A, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and three years respectively. They have also been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each for the offences under Sections 306 and 498A, Indian Penal Code.2. Deceased Kalanbai was second wife of appellant Balram. This marriage took place five years before the death of Kalanbai. She committed suicide by setting her ablaze on 26-3-1987 in the house of her husband. Appellant Maharani is his mother. Rambatibai (P.W.10) is first wife of appellant Balram. She has remarried Kaluram and she is living with him. These facts are not in dispute.3. This case was referred to the Division Bench on a question of law. That was whether Section 113A of the Evidence Act is attracted where the wife who has committed suicide was not 'legally married'. It has been answered in the affirmative.4. The only point which has been raised in this app...
Tag this Judgment!Balram and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3944
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellants Balram and Maharani have been convicted under Sections 306 and 498A, I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and three years respectively. They have also been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each for the offences under Sections 306 and 498A, I.P.C.2. Deceased Kalanbai was second wife of appellant Balram. This marriage took place five years before the death of Kalanbai. She committed suicide by setting her ablaze on 26-3-1987 in the house of her husband. Appellant Maharani is his mother. Rambatibai (P.W. 10) is first wife of appellant Balram. She has remarried Kaluram and she is living with him. These facts are not in dispute.3. This case was referred to the Division Bench on a question of law. That was whether Section 113A of the Evidence Act is attracted where the wife who has committed suicide was not 'legally married'. It has been answered in the affirmative.4. The only point which has been raised in this appeal is whether the app...
Tag this Judgment!Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Vs. Rajveer Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1999
Reported in: [2000(85)FLR389]; (2000)IIILLJ585MP; 2000(2)MPLJ10
ORDERS. S. Jha, J. 1. This petition is filed challenging the Award passed by the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court No. 1. Gwalior under the Industrial Disputes Act, on a reference by the appropriate Government under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'Act').2. Respondent Rajveer Singh was appointed as a technician with the petitioner- institute. Respondent Rajveer Singh is an industrial workman who served between the period from November 16, 1981 to June 14, 1986. His services were satisfactory. On account of personal annoyance, the respondent was served with a charge-sheet on November 8, 1985. Thereafter, a domestic inquiry was conducted by Shri Chandra Shekhar Dixit, Advocate. It is alleged that Shri Chandra Shekhar Dixit, Advocate is a friend of founder Director of the petitioner-Institute. The respondent was removed from service on the basis of inquiry report. It was alleged that the domestic inquiry was conducted in a most unfair m...
Tag this Judgment!Madhya Pradesh State Road Trans. Corpn. and anr. Vs. Pratap and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ270; 2000(1)MPLJ84
S.C. Pandey, J.1. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the death took place prior to commencement of amendment in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act'). Prior to amendment, the minimum liability for death under the heading of no fault liability, governed by Section 140 of the Act was Rs. 25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand). Since the death occurred on 31.7.1992, the Claims Tribunal could not have assumed that the respondents are entitled to Rs. 50,000 without considering the fact that the amendment was not in force on the date on which the accident occurred. It was argued that amendment is not retrospective in operation. Learned counsel for the appellants is right as the Full Bench decision of this court in the case of Jivra Khan v. Shiv Charan Das 1999 ACJ 771 (MP), laid down that the amendment in the year 1994 in Section 140 of the Act is not retrospective in operation and, therefore, any person who suffers an accident prior to the commencement of the amendme...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Krishna Pandey Vs. Rama Nand Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ1107
S.C. Pandey, J.1. Counsel for the parties heard. This is an appeal against the interim award dated 15.1.1999, passed by XIIth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur (henceforth 'the Claims Tribunal'), in Claim Case No. 44 of 1998.2. The appellant filed a claim on the foundation of the allegations that on 24.12.1997 the appellant suffered injuries in an accident caused by truck No. CPJ 5953. It was claimed that the appellant suffered permanent disability of his right foot and suffered injuries on the left knee. The X-ray taken in the Medical College Hospital showed that he suffered fracture of fibula bone. Thereafter, in a private hospital it was found that instead of one fracture there were two fractures.3. The Claims Tribunal found that the injuries suffered by the appellant may be of grievous nature within the meaning of Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code but they were not covered by Section 142 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The finding was that the fracture of fibula ...
Tag this Judgment!Piraniya Through Lrs Vs. Makhan Alias Makhan Lal Kachhi and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ364
S.C. Pandey, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (henceforth 'the Act of 1939'), arising out of the order dated 26.7.89, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, in Claim Case No. 19 of 1988.2. It appears that one Jamuna Yadav died in a motor accident on 7.1.1988. Thereupon, his mother Piraniya filed an application under Section 110-A of 'the Act of 1939', claiming compensation for the death of Jamuna, from the owner and driver of the vehicle. The claim was valued at Rs. 65,000 (Rs. sixty-five thousand).3. It appears that during the pendency of the claim case, Piraniya also died and, therefore, an application, purporting to be under Order 22, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was filed for substituting the name of Ram Sewak, son of Gangadeen Chamar and Ghanshoo Chamar, son of Gajji Chamar. So far as Ghanshoo Chamar was concerned, he is son of Piraniya and so far as Ram Sewak was concerned, he is nephew of Piraniya. No objection appears...
Tag this Judgment!Arvind Iron and Steel Company Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd., Bhila ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1999
Reported in: AIR2000MP247
Dipak Misra, J. 1. In this appeal preferred under Section 39(1)(vi) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the appellant has called in question the correctness of the judgment dated 24-11-90 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Durg in Civil Suit No. 88-A/1988 whereby he had refused to set aside the award dated 15-1-1987 passed by the sole arbitrator. 2. The facts as have been unfolded are that the appellant is a partnership firm duly registered under the provisions of Indian Partnership Act, 1932. The respondent No. 1. Steel Authority of India Limited is a Government of India undertaking duly incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The appellant had entered into a contract with the respondent No. 1 by which he was conferred a right to recover, remove and lift iron scrap from the Blast Furnace Slag Dump at Bhilai and use the same against the agreed payment between the period from 21-6-82 to 20-6-83. The total price payable unde...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Tiwari Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ332
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is the first appeal directed against judgment and decree dated 10-8-1989 passed by the District Judge, Ambikapur, district Sarguja in Civil Suit No. 51-A of 1987 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff Jagdish Tiwari in toto on the grounds of limitation and non-payment of court fee.2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that in Sarguja Forest Division, an auction notice was issued on 27-8-1983 in respect of 3020 Khair trees. The plaintiff also gave his bid in this auction but he was not informed about the so called acceptance of his bid at any point of time. It is alleged that no communication dated 29-11-1983 was ever received by the plaintiff; therefore, he could not know whether his bid had been accepted or not. Communication dated 8-2-1984 by the defendant No. 2 was said to have been sent to the plaintiff on the wrong address and it was received by the plaintiff in March 1984 on being redirected from the wrong address and then only the plaintiff came to...
Tag this Judgment!Ramjilal Jagannath and ors. and Kailash Chand Vs. Assistant Commission ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: [2000]241ITR758(MP)
R. S. Garg, J.1. This order shall dispose of Writ Petition No. 4127 of 1994 (Ramjilal Jagannath v. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Raipur) and Writ Petition No. 1803 of 1993 (Kailash Chand v. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Jabalpur).2. The facts in a nutshell for disposal of these two petitions are that in a raid made in the premises of the petitioners' firms and their partners of Writ Petition No. 4127 of 1994 between January 9, 1992 to January 13, 1992, cash amounting to Rs. 3,50,000 was seized. The petitioners moved different applications for adjustment of the seized amount towards the advance tax for the financial year 1991-92, the relevant assessment year being 1992-93. The respondents did not appropriate the said amount towards the payment of the advance tax, therefore, the petitioners have filed Writ Petition No. 4127 of 1994, seeking a direction against the respondents that they be asked to adjust the said amount of Rs. 3,50,000 towards the advance tax.3. In Writ Petition ...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Kumar Shukla Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALT(Cri)9; 1999CriLJ4507; 1999(2)MPLJ374
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellant Vinod Kumar Shukla has been convicted under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act, 1959 for unlawful possession of a firearm and a cartridge and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and to a fine of Rs. 10,000/-.2. The prosecution case relevant for the decision of this appeal is that on 14-6-1993 at 2.40 p.m. Virendra Pratap Singh (P.W. 8), Sub-Inspector of Police recovered a country made pistol (Katta) and a cartridge from appellant Vinod Kumar Shukla on his personal search near the bridge of the Karkeli railway station. This firearm and the cartridge were seized from him as per seizure memo Ex. P-4 in the presence of two witnesses Santosh Kumar and Ramswaroop (P.W. 5). The sanction for prosecution of the appellant was granted by the District Magistrate, Shahdol by order dated 14-9-1993 Ex. P-8 as required by Section 39 of the Arms Act.3. The accused pleaded not guilty. He has denied the recovery of the Katta and a cartridge from his possession.4. T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »