Madhya Pradesh Court February 2000 Judgments
Koshalya Bai Vs. Dagdoolal Matre
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: II(2000)DMC255; 2000(2)MPLJ3
V.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 11.7.1994 in Civil Suit No. 50-A/92 by Additional District Judge, Harda granting a decree of divorce under Section 13(l)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called as 'Act' for short).2. The parties admittedly were married according to the Hindu customs on 15.5.1991 at village Bhaura, District Betul. After marriage the appellant/wife resided with respondent/husband for a period of about one month at village Bhaura, Tahsil Shahpet.3. The case of the respondent/husband was that after the marriage he discovered that his wife-the appellant was ailing since last many years. The appellant/wife also disclosed to her husband/respondent mat her father married her against her wishes with the respondent, so that he could get rid of the worries ' about the appellant. The respondent/husband also averred that the appellant/wife used to maltreat him by his family members. She would humiliate and insult the ...
Tag this Judgment!State of M.P. Vs. Ganesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)MPHT69
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is an appeal by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Code) challenging the Order of acquittal passed by Shri M.K. Saini, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Burhanpur on 12-2-1999 in Criminal Case No. 384 of 1996.2. The charge-sheet as per Section 173 of the Code was submitted by the police on 17-4-1996. Charge under Section 324 I.P.C. was framed on 2-11-1996 against accused Ganesh for voluntarily causing hurt to Bhaulal by a sharp weapon. He pleaded not guilty. The case was fixed for evidence on 10-2-1997 and the Magistrate directed that the summons be issued to the prosecution witnesses. The same Order was repeated on 10-2-1997,13-5-1997, 20-10-1997 and 21-7-1998 as the summons were not issued. The summons were issued for the first time on 11-1-1999. The case was fixed on 12-2-1999 for evidence. On that date five prosecution witnesses including complainant Bhaulal were present. The case was taken ...
Tag this Judgment!Waman Vs. Baldevdas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT39; 2000(3)MPLJ328
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The respondent as plaintiff filed a Civil Suit No. 8-B/91 in the Court of Civil Judge, Class-I, Burhanpur for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,375/-. It was pleaded in the plaint that the plaintiff had advanced a loan of Rs. 6,000/- to the defendant and the said amount was to carry interest at the rate of 2 % per month. It was further put forth in the plaint that the defendant had executed a promissory note in respect of the amount in question. As the defendant failed to pay the loan a notice was served on him and when no response came the suit was filed. The petitioner, did not contest the suit and eventually an ex parte decree was passed against him. The respondent sought to execute the decree in execution proceeding. In the decree a petition was filed under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure contending, inter alia, that the decree passed by the concerned Court is a nullity in as much as it is hit by Section 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke ...
Tag this Judgment!Dewan Gond Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT206
Usha Shukla, J.1. For the homicidal death of Banthu Gada on 24-9-1987, his friend accused Dewan Gond was prosecuted under Sections 302 and 201, IPC. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the Sessions Judge, Raigarh. This jail appeal has been filed by the accused challenging his conviction and sentence.2. Accused Dewan and deceased Banthu were friends. They were exorcists and frequently went out together for work. The case for the prosecution is that a couple of days before his murder the accused had gone to the house of the deceased and the two of them had gone together for work. He did not return back home. Later on his body was found in the Badi of the accused with as many as 10 injuries on his head and neck.3. The body was first seen by Chowkidar Sunau (P.W. 1). He also noticed a trail of blood from the courtyard of the accused upto his Badi, and Ramwati (P.W. 5) and Budhiyarin (P.W. 6) who are the wife and daughter of the accused, told the witnesses t...
Tag this Judgment!S.K. Goyal Oil Mill and anr. Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Indore and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2000
Reported in: AIR2000MP212; 2000(3)MPHT372
ORDERDeepak Verma, J.1. This order shall also govern disposal of W.P. No. 922 of 1995 (Anjane Solvent India v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti) and W.P. No. 1671 of 1995 (Laxmi Solvant v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti), as in all these petitions, common questions of law and facts are projected. Thus, all are being heard analagously and are being disposed of by a common order. Even otherwise, vide order dated 15-12-1999, and order dated 18-9-1996. passed respectively in W.P. No. 922 of 1995 and W.P. No. 1671 of 1995, they were directed to be heard along with this petition.2. Even though, the question posed for consideration in the said petition, appears to have been answered by series of judgments of this Court, as well as by the Apex Court, from time to time, with each one of them, I would be dealing later, but still on account of obdurate attitude of respondent No. 1 Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, the petitioners have been constrained to approach this Court again for redressal of their grievances, whi...
Tag this Judgment!ibrahim Haji Mohammadali Malekwala Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2000
Reported in: [2001]121STC471(MP)
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. All these three Misc. Petition Nos. 862 of 1991, 28 of 1993 and 1647 of 1993 have been heard as connected matters as a common question, purely of law, arises in these petitions.2. M.P. No. 862 of 1991 arises from the order dated April 6, 1991 (annexure C) passed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P., Indore under Section 42-B of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (for short 'the M.P. Act'), on a petition submitted by the petitioner-assessee on the form as prescribed under Rule 61-B seeking determination of the question as to whether 'niwars' made of 'mono filament yarn' is liable to sales tax under the Act of 1958 The Commissioner answered the question in affirmative, holding that only the niwars made up of cotton yarn are exempted from payment of tax under the State Government Notification No. F.A-3-21-1985 (24)-ST-V dated April 11, 1985 issued under Section 12 of the M.P. Act.3. The other two petitions (Nos. 28 of 1993 and 1647 of 1993) arise out of the Notifi...
Tag this Judgment!Ghanshyamsingh and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2000
Reported in: 2000(1)MPHT684
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. By this petition (though filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, but in fact this is petition under Article 227 of the Constitution), the petitioners seek quashment of the order Annexure D, passed in Review by respondent No. 3, the Sub Divisional Officer Jaora and all consequential proceedings taken thereafter.2. The petitioners are the joint tenure holders of certain agricultural lands situated at village Rignod, Tehsil Jaora, District Ratlam. Proceedings under M.P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960 were initiated against petitioner No. 1 in 1970 and final order was passed on 16-2-89 (vide Annexure A) by the S.D.O. Jaora in Case No. 193-A/90-B-3/74-75. Certain lands were declared as surplus and vested in the State under Sections 11 & 12 of the Act. However, the S.D.O. on its own motion and after seeking permission of the Collector on 20-3-81 (vide Annexure C) undertook review of the order Annexure A. Final order of review was passed on 23-3-91 vide A...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kumar @ Raj Kumar Rathore Vs. State of M.P. Through P.S. Inderganj
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2644; 2000(1)MPHT661; 2000(2)MPLJ43
ORDERMaithli Sharan, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 read with Section 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, invoking the inherent powers of this Court.2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this petition lie in a narrow compass; a criminal case for the offences under Sections 420, 120B, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioner and other co-accused persons. Undisputedly, the petitioner was arrested on 9-3-1998, and after the charge-sheet having been filed in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, charges were framed on 15-2-1999, and on 27-2-1999 the evidence in the case, for the first time, was recorded. Thereafter other dates in the case were fixed by the learned Magistrate, but somehow the trial could not be concluded till date. Meanwhile, much after completion of period of 60 days from 27-2-99, the petitioner filed an application under Section 437(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the trial Court praying therein th...
Tag this Judgment!Akram and Another Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: I(2000)ACC614; 2000CriLJ3520; 2001(1)MPHT3
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. The question to be adjudicated is 'whether the Magistrate trying the cases of petty nature should grant exemption to the accused who has been represented by an advocate or counsel, and wants to get his case tried in accordance with provisions of law.2. The prosecution case seems to be that petitioners were foundcarrying some school boys - seven in number - in the bus when they were apprehended by the police who registered a crime against them for infringing the provisions of Section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as Act for convenience). Shri Trivedi submitted that the petitioners want to contest the case only because they want to oblige those school going boys for enabling them to reach the school in time. Shri Trivedi further submitted that the petitioners want to challenge the improper and arbitrary attitude of the police officials in such case who do not bother much for humanitarian spirit. Shri Trivedi submitted that the offence ...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Agarwal Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)MPHT37; 2000(1)MPLJ639
ORDERMaithli Sharan, J.1. Heard both the learned counsel on the instant application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the applicant, Ashok Agarwal. Perused the case-diary.2. Brief prima facie facts, as they appear in the case-diary, are that on 7-9-1999 at about 7.40 A.M. when deceased Balveer Singh was going to take bath, two fake persons in police uniform reached over there and told him that there were some arrest warrants against his two sons and they had been called by the Town Inspector, Inderganj Police Station. Meanwhile, two persons, dressed in plain clothes, who were present over there, fired at Balveer Singh, who died instantaneously. 'Dehati-Nalishi' was lodged at the Police Station, Padav by Smt. Rani Chauhan, widow of deceased Balveer Singh. The investigation was started by the police.3. Prima facie, it appears that during the course of investigation, which is still going on and much has to be done in this regard, the name o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »