Madhya Pradesh Court December 2000 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.
Smt. Kaushalyabai Vs. Kuldeep and Four ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2000
Reported in: I(2002)DMC130
ORDERS.C. Pandey, J.1. This revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment dated 17.2.2000, delivered by Sessions Judge, Sagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2000 arising out of judgment dated 31.1.2000, delivered by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sagar, in Criminal Case No. 944 of 1999.2. The applicant/complainant has filed this revision being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 17.2.2000, whereby the Sessions Judge, Sagar has set aside the conviction and sentence of the non-applicant Nos. 1 to 4 under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The non-applicant Nos. 1 to 4 were convicted and sentenced by the Trial Magistrate to undergo R.I. for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each, in default whereof, to further undergo R.I. for six months each, under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. They were further convicted and sentenced by the Trial Magistrate to undergo R.I. for one year e...
Premnarayan and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2000
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT106
Fakhruddin, J.1. Appellants have preferred this appeal against their convictions and sentences passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore, in Sessions Trial No. 65/83, decided on 31-8-1989.2. Appellant Premnarayan was convicted under Section 326 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine ofRs. 1,000.00. He has also been convicted under Section 325/34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and pay a fine of Rs. 200.00. Appellant No. 2 Gangaram has been convicted under Sections 326/34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 1,000.00. He has also been convicted under Section 325 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 200.00. Appellant No. 3 Gajraj Singh and appellant No. 4 Dulichand each has been convicted under Section 326/34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 1,000.00. Each of them has also been convicted under Sectio...
Satish Tiwari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2000
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT473; 2001(2)MPLJ451
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issue of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to allot the cleaning work relating to the concerned ward for a period of one year and further to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashment of order dated 24-4-99 and Annexure P. 7 by which the earnest money of the petitioner has been forfeited and for grant of consequential benefits.2. The facts as have been unfurled are that the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur published a notice inviting tender (in short NIT) in the local news paper on 12-3-99 with regard to cleaning arrangement at Jakir Hussain Ward Zone No. 7. As per the NIT the earnest money of Rs. 50,000/- was to be deposited. The petitioner deposited the earnest money and participated in the tender. As per the tender condition No. 14 the work order is to be given for a period of one year. ...
Nathoo Badai Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT199; 2001(2)MPLJ698
Fakhruddin, J. 1. Appellant being aggrieved by his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of life imprisonment, passed by the Ist Addl.Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh, by judgment dated 9-12-88, in Sessions Trial No. 114/87, has preferred this appeal.2. Briefly stated prosecution story is that the incident had occurred on 17-7-1987 at about 10 a.m. The cattle belonging to the complainant party had gone for grazing in the field of accused persons. Sukko Bai, daughter of accused Jalam chased the cattle to the field of Ramcharan, owing to which a sudden quarrel took place between Baijnath and Sukko Bai. Sukko Bai threw stone on Baijnath, on which Baijnath slapped her and a scuffle took place. Sukko Bai went to her house and narrated the incident. Thereafter, accused persons armed with Lathi, Kholia and Kulhadi came to the scene of occurrence and started assaulting the complainant party. Baijnath sustained injury and Ramcharan who had come there was also beaten by Jal...
Ram Raghav Chaturvedi Vs. State of M.P. and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT188; 2001(2)MPLJ457
ORDERS.C. Pandey, J.1. This revision is filed under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 16-10-95 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 95/94 by the IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, arising out of judgment delivered in Criminal Case No. 342/94 on 29-9-94 by the JMFC, Jabalpur.2. The question involved in this revision is whether an offence committed by the applicant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the Act') is compoundable.3. Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') does not mention any other offence under another enactment. The table mentioned in sub-section (1) of Section 320 of the Code mentions offence under Indian Penal Code which are compoundable without the permission of the Court. Sub-section (2) of Section 320 of the Code gives a table of those offences committed under the Penal Code which are compoundable with the permission of the Court. According to sub-section (5) of Section 320, lea...
Deora Wire and Wires and anr. Vs. General Manager, Dic and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2000
Reported in: [2001]123STC360(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The question that falls for consideration in this writ filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by the petitioner is, whether the petitioner is entitled to claim extension in the period of exemption from payment of sales tax for a period of 278 days after December 15, 1989 To appreciate the grievance of the petitioner, few facts emerging from the record of the case set up by the parties need mention.2. Petitioner is a small-scale industry. It has one industrial unit at Indore. It is engaged in the manufacture of various types of wire. It is registered as dealer under the provisions of State Sales Tax Laws.3. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (since repealed) the State has issued exemption Notification exempting certain specified categories of goods on fulfilment of certain conditions specified therein from payment of sales tax. In some cases, the notification provides for exemption from payment...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pradip Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ2016
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. These two appeals M.A. No. 139 of 1995 (New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Pradip Kumar) and M.A. No. 373 of 1995 (Pradip Kumar v. Ramchandra) are proposed to be decided by this judgment since they arise out of the same award dated 6.12.1994 passed by the 13th Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, in Claim Case No. 100 of 1991. M.A. No. 373 of 1995 has been preferred by the claimant for enhancement of compensation while M.A. No. 139 of 1995 is by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. for reduction of the compensation awarded in the case.2. Briefly facts are that Pradip Kumar (hereinafter 'the claimant') met with an accident on 8.1.1988 when truck No. CII 7461 dashed against his scooter No. CPE 7329. The truck was being driven by Gajraj and was insured with the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. As a result of this accident, the claimant was shifted to M.Y. Hospital, Indore. Thereafter, he was shifted to Gokul Das Hospital, Indore, because better treatment was available there...
Jaideep Neema and Others Vs. the Collector, Mandsaur and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-2000
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT151; 2001(2)MPLJ246
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. This petition is pending for hearing on admission sicne October, 1999. Either it has not been admitted nor dismissed. There is no point in keeping such matters pending for hearing on admission for months together and to add to the piling heap of arrears. The short point is to be adjudicated and, therefore, this petition is being decided finally at Motion Hearing stage, in the interest of justice.2. Shri A.K. Sethi, counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that Janpad Panchayat, Sitamau Distt. Mandsaur, invited applications for appointment to the post of 'Shiksha Karmi Grade-III' by its advertisement dated 20-5-1998 published in 'Dainik Dhwaj'. He pointed out that two separate categories were classified by the said advertisement itself and out of them one was 'Shiksha Vibhag' and second was 'Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission'. According to his case 309 posts were categorised for the appointment of Shiksha Karmi Grade-Ill from Shiksha Vibhag and 16 posts were cla...
Vishnoo Kant Awasthi Vs. Jagdeesh Prasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-2000
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT93; 2002(3)MPLJ420
ORDERV.K. Agrawal, J. 1. By the impugned order, application of defendant/respondent under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of CPC, for setting aside ex-parte judgment and decree dated 25-10-91 in Civil Suit No. 105-A/91 was allowed and the suit was directed to be proceeded biparte.2. The plaintiff/petitioner filed a suit for eviction of defendant/respondent. Summons for settlement of issues was issued by the Trial Court. The process server reported that the defendant/respondent had refused service of summons. Accordingly, the Trial Court proceeded against him ex-parte. After recording evidence of plaintiff/petitioner ex-parte judgment and decree was passed.3. The defendant/respondent filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of CPC, stating that the summon was never tendered to him and that he did not refuse to accept it and that the plaintiff/petitioner had obtained the ex-parte judgment and decree by playing fraud on the Court. Therefore, he prayed that th...
Dr. Sanjay Tiwari Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-01-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)MPLJ232
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The petitioner after passing M.B.B.S. from Pt. J.N.M. Medical College, Raipur, appeared in the M.P. Medical and Dental Post Graduate Entrance Examination 1997 and was placed at S. No. 315 in the merit list. The petitioner opted for Diploma Course in Pathology in Medical College, Rewa. As a post in M.D. Pathology was vacant the petitioner applied for change of Course but the same was not paid heed to. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed a writ petition No. W.P. 4828/99 wherein this Court held as under :--'During the pendency of the said writ petition the petitioner by order dated 11-7-2000 was permitted to change from the Diploma Course to Post Graduate in Pathology.'2. As the relief was granted the learned counsel for the petitioner withdrew the Writ Petition No. 4828/99. After Annexure P-9 came into existence the petitioner was not allowed to change his Course. On the contrary the said order was stayed on the ground that the petitioner had completed Diploma C...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »