Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Gurubachan Singh Vs. Food Corporation of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1999
Reported in: AIR2000MP172; 2000(2)MPLJ54
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. The judgment in this appeal shall also decide the connected appeal F.A. No. 165 of 1997 between the same parties and in which common questions of law and fact have been raised. 2. The appellant is a transport contractor and his tender submitted at 296% above the schedule of rates fixed by the respondent Food Corporation of India was accepted for work of transport of the goods of the corporation for the period between 15-5-87 to 14-5-89. In both the suits giving rise to these two appeals, the appellant's claim as transporter is that he has not been paid in full for the work in accordance with the agreed terms and conditions of the contract. In both the appeals the common question arises is about the interpretation of schedule of rates in long route transport work contained in Appendix V of the Tender Document which admittedly regulate the terms and conditions of the contract between the parties. The contractor first filed Civil Suit 14B-88 seeking a decree for ...
Lal Sahib and ors. Vs. Indra Sen S/O Anoop Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ624
ORDERMaithili Sharan, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court.2. The brief facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioners are the prosecution witnesses in Sessions Trial No. 49 of 1987, State of M. P. v. Anup Singh and eight others pending in the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri, in which the non-petitioners Nos. 1 to 9 are being tried for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 326, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code for causing deaths of two persons viz., Parmalsingh and Bhaiyalal, and for causing injuries to other persons. These petitioners were examined in the above mentioned sessions trial in the year 1987. On 19-8- 1999 they submitted an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, through a private counsel, praying for their re-examination in the Court as they wanted to disclose the fact that actually they had not witnessed the alleged incident ...
Lal Sahib and Five ors. Vs. Indra Sen and Nine ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT87
ORDERMaithli Sharan, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court.2. The brief facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioners are the prosecution witnesses in Sessions Trial No. 49 of 1987 (State of M.P. v. Anup Singh and eight others) pending in the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri, in which the non-petitioners No. 1 to 9 are being tried for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 326, 147, 148 & 149 of the Indian Penal Code for causing deaths of two persons viz., Parmalsingh and Bhaiyalal, and for causing injuries to other persons. These petitioners were examined in the above mentioned sessions trial in the year 1987. On 19-8-99 they submitted an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, through a private counsel, praying for their re-examination in the Court as they wanted to disclose the fact that actually they had not witnessed the alleged incident in ques...
Prithvi Raj Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT601
C.K. Prasad, J.1. Petitioner is Safai Daroga, working in Nagar Panchayat, Kymore. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, he prays for quashing of the order dated 5-8-1999 (Annexure P-8) whereby while sanctioning one post of Sanitary Inspector it has been directed that the same shall be reserved for the members of the Scheduled Caste. Further prayer made by the petitioner is to quash the communication dated 21-1-1999 (Annexure P-15) in which respondent No. 2 has communicated to respondent No. 3 that the post of Sanitary Inspector be filled by the members of the Scheduled Caste,2. In spite of service of notice on respondents 1 and 2, although Shri Ajay Raizada appears on their behalf, but no return has been filed. Return has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 3.3. It is the stand of the petitioner that the post of Sanitary Inspector being single post, cannot be reserved for the members of the Scheduled Caste. Assertion made by the petitio...
Ramchandra Tiwari Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT614; 2000(2)MPLJ208
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner's conviction for offence under Section 409 IPC made by A.C.J.M. Bilaspur in Cr. Case No. 1460/80 by judgment dated 11-6-90 was confirmed by the impugned judgment of VI Addl. Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Cr. Appeal Nos. 74/90 and 63/90 decided on 13-6-94. The appellate Court reduced the sentence to R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs. 1500/- while the Magistrate had sentenced him to R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs. 1500/-.2. The charge found established by the two Courts below was that in his capacity as Co-operative Inspector of village Lormi he was authorised by B.D.O. Lormi to bring 500 bags of wheat from the godown of F.C.I. Bilaspur for the purpose of distribution to labourers under wheat for work scheme. Under this authorisation the petitioner drew 500 quintals of wheat from godown of F.C.I. Bilaspur. It was taken in 2 instalments, first of 400 bags on 10-7-80. It was transported in 4 trucks to Lormi. Thereafter, since wheat was short by 12 quintal...
Ram Swaroop Rathore Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1882
R.S. Garg, J.1. The appellant/accused being aggrieved by the judgment dated 29-7-97 passed in Special Case No. If/89 by the learned 5th Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (C.B.I.), Jabalpur, convicting the appellant under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 2 years under each count and pay fine of Rs. 2,500/- under each count, in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for 6 months under each count, has filed this appeal.2. The prosecution case in brief is that the accused/appellant Ram Swaroop Rathore who was posted as Chargeman Grade-I in the Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur, with the help and assistance of Vijay Kumar Tiwari made a demand from C. Bhatacharya an engineer of M/s. Adwani Orelicon Limited.3. The accused Ram Swaroop was working as Chargeman Grade-I in the W.I. section of Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur. Another accused Vijay Kumar Tiwari (since acquitted) was posted in Examiner sect...
Laxman Singh Vs. Jagannath
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT384; 2000(1)MPLJ79
S.S. Jha, J.1. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:--(i) 'Whether in the absence of requirements of Order VII Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure whereby full particulars and identity of disputed portion is not mentioned in the plaint, suit is liable to be decreed ?'(ii) 'Whether in the absence of map of demarcation and proof of report of demarcation the appellate Court was right in considering the document of Panchanama ?'(iii) 'Whether the suit of plaintiff was maintainable without impleading the State of M.P. as provided under Order 1 Rule 3-B of Code of Civil Procedure ?'2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent has filed a civil suit for possession of agricultural land. The plaintiff claimed that he is the Bhumiswami of the land bearing survey No. 101, area 0.240 hectare, situated in village Bamuliya, Tehsil Sironj, District Vidisha. This land is 'Kheda'. A public road is on the western side of the land. The house of the defendan...
Anil Tiwari and ors. Vs. Saheb Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ471; 2000(1)MPLJ59
Usha Shukla, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 2.1.1997 passed by the Second Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Khandwa, dismissing the petition for compensation filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.2. Deceased Shanker alias Ashok was the son of late Beni Prasad Tiwari. The appellant No. 2 Rameshwar Tiwari is the brother of late Beni Prasad. Appellant Nos. 1 and 3, namely, Anil Tiwari and Tarabai are the son and wife of Rameshwar Tiwari. They claim to be the legal representatives of deceased Shanker on the ground that having lost his mother while he was a small child, he was brought up by his uncle appellant No. 2. His father had also expired in the year 1987, and deceased had left no other heirs except the appellants.3. The case of the appellants was that deceased Shanker alias Ashok was working as a cleaner on the truck of Janinder Singh, respondent No. 2, and was getting a salary of Rs. 1,500 per month. Respondent No. 1 was the driver of this...
Nyaju Niyaj Mohd. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ768
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J. 1. This petition is hereby decided finally at this stage because the petition is connected with the proceeding which is initiated against the petitioner in view of Provisions of Sections 5 & 8 of the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990, (Herein after referred to as 'the Adhiniyam' for convenience).2. The proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner in view of the above mentioned Provision of the Adhiniyam as the District Magistrate, Dhar has been informed that the petitioner has criminal history and therefore his being at large in the society, is dangerous to the safety and property of the citizens residing in the particular area. While showing the cause in response to the notice issued to him in view of the provisions of Section 8 of the Adhiniyam, the petitioner expressed his desire to examine certain witnesses. He also made a prayer that these witnesses be summoned by District Magistrate who was conducting the said proceeding. The District Magi...
Vikas Jagdish Shivpuria Vs. Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Indore and an ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: AIR2000MP53; 2000(1)MPHT596; 1999(2)MPLJ590
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. By this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the Notification dated 19-4-1999 and also the order dated 27-5-1999 issued by the Respondents whereby the degree of the petitioner of Bachlor of Engineering is cancelled by the Respondents. In this petition, the petitioner is claiming the writ of certiorari for quashing the Notification dated 19-4-1999 and the order dated 27-5-1999.2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that he belongs to 'Chattri' tribe which is a scheduled tribe which is notified by State of Madhya Pradesh as Scheduled at Item No. 25 of the list of Scheduled Tribe declared under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976. After passing of the Higher Secondary Examination, the petitioner appeared in Pre-Engineering Test Examination in the year 1992 and was selected against the reserved seat for S. T. and was admitted to S.I.S.T.is College, Indore and passed his B.E. co...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »