Madhya Pradesh Court February 2000 Judgments
Madhusudan Vs. Chandarlal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)MPHT369
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This appeal is preferred by one of the defendants of Civil Suit No. 21-A/91 under Order 43 Rule (1) (d) of C.P. Code against an Order dated 12-3-1997, passed by XIV Additional District Judge, Indore, in CMJC No. 4/95 arising out of CS No. 21-A/91. By impugned order, the application made by the appellant under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P. Code seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree has been rejected. Facts in brief for the disposal of this appeal need mention infra.2. Respondent No. 1 (plaintiff) filed a Civil Suit No. 21-A/91 against the appellant (defendant) and the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 claiming specific performance of contract in respect of agricultural land on the basis of contract entered into between appellant and one late Manohar Chunekar - father of appellant.3. The suit was being contested by the appellant. A written statement was filed. Issues were framed.4. On 7-2-1995, the case was fixed for recording evidence of both the parties. On this date, counsel ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohar Singh and anr. Vs. Trilok Chand and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-2000
Reported in: II(2000)ACC100; 2000ACJ1011; 2000(1)MPLJ463
S.P. Srivastava and N.G. Karambelkar, JJ.1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants. Perused the record.This appeal, which arises out of the proceedings initiated by the claimants-appellants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act is directed against the order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, whereunder the present appellants have been found entitled to a total amount of Rs. 1,89,200 with 12 per cent per annum interest from the date of filing of the application towards compensation in respect of the death of their son, Tehsildar Singh, aged 20 years in the motor accident which took place on 12.1.1996.2. The Tribunal has found that the deceased, son of the claimants who had read only up to 5th class, was having an income of Rs. 1,800 per month. It may be noticed that the father of the deceased, the present appellant No. 1, was aged 45 years at the time of the accident while the mother of the deceased, the present appellant No. 2, was aged about 40 years. The decea...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan S/O Nankusiya Satnami Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ3046
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellants Mohan and Dilip have been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of R Section 2,000/- each.2. The prosecution case was that Soni Bai (PW-1) aged about 16 years was alone in her house in village Belsari on 5-3-1996. That was the day of Holi. Accused Mohan and Dilip entered in her house at about 2.00 p.m. and asked her where her maternal uncle Rekhalal (PW-2) had gone. She replied that he has gone to another village. Both the accused persons took her inside a room and bolted it. Accused Mohan was first to commit rape on her. At that time accused Dilip kept her mouth closed. Thereafter accused Dilip had forcible sexual intercourse and at that time accused Mohan was keeping her on the ground. Both the accused persons left her house after commission of the crime. After gaining some consciousness she took water and hastened to the house of her maternal aunt Kamla Bai (PW- 3) and narrated ...
Tag this Judgment!Nav Bharat Press (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-2000
Reported in: [2000(86)FLR556]; (2000)IILLJ1275MP; 2000(3)MPHT240
Dipak Misra, J. 1. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court the petitioners have prayed for issue of writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated May 24, 1988 contained in Annexure I and the recovery certificate Annexure J issued in pursuance of the said order.2. The facts as have been unfolded are that the original respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 17(1) of the Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for recovery of an amount of Rs. 25,992.50 towards the differential salary which was due to him under the Palekar Award. He also prayed for gratuity. The arrears of salary were claimed for the period October, 1979 to January, 1986. The petitioner resisted the said claim filing an objection. It was put forth before the competent authority that the respondent No. 3 was not in employment of the petitioners herein and, therefore, was not entitle...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›