Madhya Pradesh Court October 2000 Judgments
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bhagwan Das and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-2000
Reported in: 2001ACJ883
S.K. Kulshrestha, J. 1. In view of order dated 4.10.2000, the parties were heard on admission.2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the insurance company has been jointly and severally saddled with the liability to pay compensation despite the fact that the insurance company had produced the certificate from the office of the concerned R.T.O. that the licence said to have been possessed by the driver of the vehicle had not been issued by the said office. The Tribunal has observed that the appellant had not raised any plea with regard to the driver not possessing the licence and the non-applicant No. 1 Ram Narayan had produced on record a copy of the licence that had been issued by the R.T.O., Shahdol. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 has brought to the notice an order dated 28.4.2000 of this court in M.A. No. 726 of 2000 in support of his contention that for proving that the driver did not possess a valid driving licence, it was necessary that the competent authorit...
Tag this Judgment!General Manager, M.P.S.R.T.C. and ors. Vs. Sujanmal Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-2000
Reported in: I(2001)ACC729
Shambhoo Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed by non-applicants against the award dated 26.11.1994 passed by the IInd Addl. Member, MACT Neemuch in Claim Case No. 39/199.2. The case of the claimant/respondent was that in the night intervening 29th and 30th November, 1991 he was travelling in bus No. M.P. 09D-3200 belonging to the appellant Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') and driven by appellant No. 2. The appellant No. 2 drove the bus in rash and negligent manner near Sagar-Gram, as a result of which it fell down from the bridge wherein the respondent aged about 56 years, sustained fracture of pelvis left hip bone and injuries on other parts of the body. He was admitted in Neemuch Hospital and thereafter was brought to District Hospital, Ratlam and from there he was shifted to M.Y. Hospital, Indore where he was operated. He suffered fracture and dislocation of central hip and fracutre of floor of right acetabulum of hip bone. There was mal-u...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1098; 2001(1)MPHT65
ORDERFakhruddin, J.1. Heard.This petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28-8-2000 whereby the application moved under Section 311, Cr. P. C. by the prosecution has been allowed.2. The application was filed on the ground that the statement of Naib Tehsildar namely Sanjeev Saxena, who had got the identification parade conducted with respect to accused and prepared the identification memo, could not be recorded and as such the said memo could not be exhibited. The prayer was therefore made for calling this witness. The prayer was further made for recalling the witnesses Kamta Prasad and Krishan Bai, who participated in the identification parade and identified the accused, for the evidence.3. The learned Trial Court after considering the entire material on record and the facts and circumstances in great detail has found that in theends of justice, the summoning of witness for recording evidence is just and proper.4....
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Shanta Bai and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ1760; 2001(1)MPHT183
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This group of three appeals (MA No. 225 of 1991, M.A. No. 226 of 1991 and M.A. No. 278 of 1991) and cross-objection under Order 41 Rule 22, CPC in M.A. No. 278 of 1991 are proposed to be disposed of by this common order as they arise out of the common award and same accident.2. Claimant in all the three appeals is Smt. Shanta Bai, widow of Kishan Singh Raghuvanshi (deceased) and her children. Cross-objection has been filed by Harjit Singh (jeep owner).3. Accident took place on 27-4-1985 when jeep MBC 185 turned turtle resulting in the death of Kishan Singh Raghuvanshi, Ku. Kavita and Ku. Sangita. The vehicle was insured with the appellant at the time of accident. Allegation is that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle. Appellant Insurance Company has taken the defence that jeep was carrying passenger for hire and reward and therefore it was not covered by the policy and the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation. ...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Ahirwar Vs. Shri Nayak Narendra and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT100
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur dated 10-2-1998 in Claim Case No. 101/1994.2. Claimant was going on his bicycle along with pillion rider Ashok Patel on 9-12-1989 from Railway Station Bridge No. 1 to Civil Lines Police Station. When he reached near Bank of India, truck No. 86D-63626 dashed against him. As a result of this accident, Ashok Patel died on the spot and while the appellant suffered grievous injuries. Compensation of Rs. 2,44,800.00 has been claimed but the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 30,000.00.3. Claimant is not satisfied with the award, therefore, it has been challenged through this appeal seeking enhancement. Learned counsel for claimant submits that meagre amount for 40% disability has been awarded, therefore, it deserves enhancement. Smt. Nair, learned counsel for respondents submits that award is just and reasonable and the appellant has been adequately compensated for the injuries sustained by him, ther...
Tag this Judgment!Revti Bai Vs. Gubra Alias Govardhan Yadav and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT161
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sconi, in M.C.C. No. 57/93, dated 5-4-1999.2. Truck No. MPJ-655 was carrying food items from Lakhnadon to village Andia. About one kilometer ahead of Kedarpur, the truck met with an accident resulting in the death of Diwarilal Jharia. Allegation is that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving by Gubra alias Govardhan Yadav. The truck was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. at the time of accident.3. The claimant is the widow of the deceased who was 40 years old at the lime of accident. The deceased was a Peon in the Kedarpur Co-operative Society with salary of Rs. 970.00 p.m.. Claim for Rs. 2,32,800.00 has been preferred. The Insurance Company has disputed the claim alleging that it is not coned and there has been violation of terms of Insurance Policy. The deceased was fare paid passenger, therefore, Insurance Company was not liable to pay compen...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shanta Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: I(2004)ACC764; 2001(2)MPLJ52
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This group of three appeals (M,A. Nos. 224,225 and 278 of 1991) and cross-objection under Order 41 Rule 22, Civil Procedure Code in M.A. No. 278 of 1991 are proposed to be disposed of by this common order as they arise out of the common award and same accident.2. Claimants in all the three appeals are Shanta Bai, widow of Kishan Singh Raghuvanshi (deceased) and herchildren. Cross-objection has been filed by Harjit Singh (jeep owner).3. The accident took place on 27.4.1985 when the jeep No. MBC 185 turned turtle resulting in death of Kishan Singh Raghuvanshi, Kavita and Sangita. The vehicle was insured with the appellant at the time of accident. Allegation is that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle. Appellant Insurance Company has taken the defence that jeep was carrying passengers for hire or reward and, therefore, it was not covered by the policy and the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation. The Tribunal has re...
Tag this Judgment!Khuman and Another Vs. Barelal and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-2000
Reported in: I(2001)DMC186; 2001(1)MPHT83
R.B. Dixit, J. 1. The short question involved in this appeal, is about status of illegitimate son in the self acquired property of deceased father.The facts found proved in the present case are as under:2. Deceased Sarua had kept as wife, deceased plaintiff Khema Bai, from whom, appellant was born. Khema Bai was residing separate from married wife of Sarua, from whom, defendant Barelal was born.3. During his life time, Sarua had partitioned his agricultural holding between himself and his son Barelal and appellant. The dispute arose between the parties after the death of Sarua regarding agricultural land, which fell to the share of deceased. Defendant/respondent No. 1 Barelal got mutation of the disputed land in his name after death of his father and also claimed it on the basis of 'will' Ex. D-1. However, appellant brought a suit for declaration and cancellation of mutation for partition claiming 1/3rd share in the suit property challenging 'will' as fake and false and further claimed...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Ashok Hotel Corporation Limited and Another Vs. the Appellate Aut ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT199
ORDERA.K. Mishra, J. 1. The learned Single Judge (S.K. Kulshrcstha, J) has made this reference for consideration and authoritative pronouncement by a large? Bench on the scope and powers of the Appellate Authority under Section 58 of M-P- Shops and Establishments Act, 1958 as to whether the said authority is under an obligation to permit the parties to adduce evidence in favour or against the cause on the basis whereof the services have been dispensed with. The learned Single Judge has doubted the correctness of the decision rendered by a Single Bench of this Court in Bajaj Electricals Ltd. v. N.K.Kanojia, 1999(1)MPSLR 131, wherein it was laid down by the learned Single Judge that the Appellate Authority had no power to permit parlies to adduce evidence and after hearing the parties the Appellate Authority has to decide the case on merits.2. The factual matrix leading to filing of this petition unfolds that the services of respondent No. 2 were terminated. He challenged the order of di...
Tag this Judgment!Dev Sharma Vs. M.P.E.B. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-2000
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT72; 2001(3)MPLJ202
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J. 1. The petitioner is hereby making a prayer to this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus in his favour and against the respondents directing the respondents to revoke the suspension order which' has been passed suspending him dated 16-4-99. The petitioner for substantiating this prayer is taking the shelter of provisions of Rule 9 (5) (a) of the M.P.E.B. Notification bearing No. 01-01/IV/ I-B-249/A/1989/16, Jabalpur, dated 5-8-89. The said 5 (a) reads :--'An order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under this rule, shall continue to remain in force until it is modified or revoked by the authority competent to do so: Provided that the order of suspension shall stand revoked on expiry of the period of 45 days from the date of order of suspension in case a copy of charges and other documents referred to in sub-rule (2-a) are not issued to such Government Servant by the disciplinary authority (if it is not the State Government) without obtaining the orders of ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »