Madhya Pradesh Court February 2000 Judgments
Narendra Kumar Vaish Vs. Smt. Shyama Agrawal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2000
Reported in: AIR2000MP253; 2000(2)MPHT268
ORDERR.B. Dixit, J. 1. Respondent-Applicant had initiated proceedings under Section 23-A (b) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') being a widow lady, for eviction of the shop of her house bearing Municipal No, 40/574 situated in Daulatganj, Lashkan Gwalior, against petitioner/non-applicant, before the Rent Controlling Authority, Gwalior (in short 'R.C.A.'), on the ground that the shop was let out to non-applicant under a rent note dated 7-9-1974. The son of the applicant-land lady Manish Kumar Agrawal has passed B.E. (Mechanical) in the year 1990 and roaming unemployed. The applicant needs this shop for starting business of her son for sale of electrical goods. 2. The petitioner/non-applicant had contested the proceedings on the ground that the shop was given to him on rent by late Suman Kant, who was husband of the applicant and Suman Kant during his lifetime, under a family arrangement, had transferred the disputed shop to his son Manish Kumar and fu...
Tag this Judgment!Paras Ram Soni Vs. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2000
Reported in: II(2000)ACC421; [2000(85)FLR615]; (2000)IILLJ752MP
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This appeal is filed under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, questioning the legality and propriety of as many as three orders in succession namely Order dated July 4, 1996, Order dated April 21, 1999 and order dated June 28, 1999, passed by the learned Commissioner Workmen's Compensation (Labour Court, Ujjain) in case No. 7/90, case No. 3/98 and case No. 18/99. Facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal need mention in brief.2. Respondent No. 2 filed a claim before the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation against the appellant (herein) claiming compensation for the injuries he suffered during the course of and arising out of an employment. It was alleged that on June 5, 1989, while the respondent was on duty working on the tractor trolly No. MOU- 5861, belonging to appellant, he suffered injuries on his body. He alleged that he was in the employment of appellant on a monthly salary of Rs. 500. He claimed a sum of Rs. 10,000 by way of compensati...
Tag this Judgment!Kedia Distilleries Ltd. Vs. Chhattisgarh Chemical Mill Mazdoor Sangh a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2000
Reported in: (2000)IILLJ1427MP; 2000(3)MPHT343
Pandey, J.1. This matter has been placed before this Full Bench on a reference made by one of us (Honourable DIPAK MISRA, J.) on the following question framed by him : 'Whether the decision rendered in the cases of Neo Sacks Limited v. CEGAT, New Delhi, 1999(114) ELT 826 (MP) and Kedia Distilleries Limited v. Sumit Usha Martin Finance Limited and Ors., L.P.A. No. 332/1999, decided on January 11, 2000, lay down the correct law to the effect that the matters arising out of all the Tribunals are to be heard by a Division Bench of this Court ?'2. The petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is against the award made by the Industrial Court (Bench at Raipur), on a reference made by the State Government under Section 51(1) of Madhy'a Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960, which was placed before a single Bench of this Court as per the roster prepared by Honourable the Chief Justice. It appears that the learned counsel for the petitioner-management raised an objection...
Tag this Judgment!Shashikant Malviya Vs. Smt. Parvati Malviya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2000
Reported in: II(2000)DMC348
S.C. Pandey, J1. The respondent filed a petition under Sections 12 and 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (henceforth 'the Act') for declaration that her marriage with the appellant be declared void. She further claimed that in case it was not possible to award aforesaid declaration by a decree, then a decree for divorce be passed. The Civil Suit No. 294-A/96 filed by the respondent was dismissed by judgment and decree dated 14.5.1997 by 4th Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur. The respondent filed First Appeal No. 310/97. This Court, by judgment and decree dated 11.11.1997, allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court dismissing the suit. A decree, declaring that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was null and void, was passed because it was held that the appellant had a spouse living at the time of the marriage with the respondent. Having declared that the respondent was entitled to declaration that her marriage ...
Tag this Judgment!State of M.P. Vs. Ramkumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)MPHT189
Fakhruddin, J.1. The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, against the judgment dated 30-6-1995, passed in Sessions Trial No. 459/94, by sixth Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain against acquittal of the respondent under Section 8 read with Section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to 'NDPS Act').2. The brief facts of the case as found by the trial Court are that on 7-10-1994, Shri N.S. Chandrawat, Station House Officer, Central Police Station Kotwali, Ujjain received information through an informant that one person is going from Nazar Ali bus-stand to Kanthal area alongwith 'Charas'. The information was recorded in 'Rojnamcha sanha', and was sent to Shri K.B. Bundeia, C.S.P. in writing. It is alleged that pursuant to this when police party reached near Mankameshwar Mandir, they found a person alongwith attache there. At that time C.S.P. Bundeia also reached there. The person was stopped...
Tag this Judgment!Ghanashyam Prasad Kurmi Patel Vs. Yashwant Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2000
Reported in: AIR2001MP68; 2001(5)MPHT63
A.K. Mishra, J. 1. These two appeals arise out of common matter. The appellants in both the appeals have filed an application to set aside the order passed ex parte by First Addl. District Judge Jabalpur in Civil Misc. Case No. 27/98 on 22-12-1989. 2. The order dated 22-12-1989 was passed on an application filed before the Court under the provisions of Section 25 of the M.P. Public Trusts Act, 1951. Bhagwan Shri Ram Janki. Trust was registered in the year 1954 under the provisions of M.P. Public Trusts Act. Its Sarwarakar was Ghanshyam Prasad Patel. The application under Section 25(3) was filed by Yashwant Singh, Madan Bihari Chadhar and Halku Prasad challenging the order passed by Registrar. Public Trusts, Paten district Jabalpur in case No. 2B/113/85-86 (Kashiram v. Ghanshyam Prasad). In the said case an order dated 8-6-1987 was passed by the Registrar, Public Trusts. Paten district Jabalpur, by which five trustees were appointed namely, Gajendra Singh Yadav. Sunderlal Patel. Laxmipr...
Tag this Judgment!Dhaniram Vs. Mrs. Kusma Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2000
Reported in: II(2000)DMC264
ORDERV.K. Agarwal, J.1. This Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 1.10.1999, by ADJ, Dindori in Guardians and Wards Case No. 3/97, whereby the petition of the appellant for custody of minor Chameli, aged 5 years, (at the time of filing of the pennon) has been dismissed.2. The appellant/petitioner filed an application under Section 7 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 r/w Section 6 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, praying for custody of his minor daughter Chameli begotten by respondent Smt. Kusma Bai. It appears that the respondent was kept as mistress by the appellant. However, both parties are now living separately. Minor Chameli-daughter of respondent is living with her.3. The application was opposed by the respondent. It was stated by the appellant that his wife Shyama Bai is residing with him. They have four daughters. The appellant is not taking care of his children; There is an order under Section 125 of Cr. P.C. against the appellant granting ma...
Tag this Judgment!Hope Textiles Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2000
Reported in: 2000(70)ECC194; 2000LC452(MP); 2000(119)ELT279(MP); 2000(2)MPHT16
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondent to pay to the petitioners interest on the delayed refund of excise duty @ 18% p.a. with quarterly rest.2. Petitioner No. 1 M/s. Hope Textiles Ltd., is a Company carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of textile. Petitioner No. 2 is its Principal Officer. The respondent had levied Central Excise duty to the tune of Rs. 2,00,240.89 on the Drills manufactured by the petitioner No. 1 during the period between June, 1978 and November, 1979. The petitioner preferred claim before the Assistant Collector, Custom & Central Excise, Indore under Section 11B of the Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944 (for short 'the Act') for refund of the aforesaid duty as according to the petitioners the duty was wrongly levied on it. The claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector vide his Order dated 30-9-80. Aggrieved by this Order the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Sovinda and Another Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT14
A.K. Mishra, J.1. The two appellants, Sovinda and Govinda, have preferred this appeal aggrieved by their convictions and the sentences imposed. Sovinda has been convicted under Sections 457 and 376/34, IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and 7 years respectively for the two offences whereas Govinda has been convicted under Sections 457 and 376, IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 5 years and 7 years respectively.2. According to the prosecution case, in the intervening night of 21st and 22nd September, 1988 prosecutrix Kisnabai was sleeping in her house. She was a married woman and her husband Jiyalal, owing to Ganpati festival, had gone to the house of Bansingh situated in front of his house. The prosecutrix had not closed the door. She was sleeping on a cot and her husband was outside. At about 12-2 in the night, Jiyalal heard the cry of Kisnabai, the prosecutrix, and came running towards his house. He found the small door of the house open. Kisnabai narrated the ...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ122MP; 2000(4)MPHT185; 2000(3)MPLJ227
ORDERS.P. Shrivastava, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate representing the respondent No. 1 on advance notice.2. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the order dated 10-1-2000 issued by the State Government and the alleged order claimed to have been passed in the proforma, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure P-10, which the petitioner asserts has not been served upon him.3. It has been asserted by the petitioner that he had been appointed as Nakedar as a daily wages employee on 17-7-1991 and has been working continuously on the said post which has now been redesignated as Assistant Sub-Inspector. It is claimed that some posts of Assistant Sub-Inspector are still lying vacant but pursuant to the direction issued by the State Government the services of the petitioner are being dispensed with. It is also asserted that ona previous occasion he had approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 1496/94, (MM No. 160 of 1994)...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »