Madhya Pradesh Court March 2000 Judgments
Agrawal Krishi Sewa Kendra Vs. Hindustan Fertilizer Corporation Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT192
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. M/s Agrawal Krishi Sewa Kendra has filed the present appeal against the Judgment dt. 8-1-1990 passed by the IIIrd Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Raipur, in Civil Suit No. 18-B/1985, whereby the Court has made an award, passed by the arbitrator, rule of the Court and the objections filed by the appellant under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, were set aside. It was ordered that Hindustan Fertilizer Corporation Ltd. was entitled for payment of Rs. 12,231/- paise 25 as per the award.2. Facts stated in brief are that Hindustan Fertilizer Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Corporation') is engaged in the manufacture, sale and supply of fertilizers. Vide agreement dt. 1-4-80, M/s Agrawal Krishi Sewa Kendra (hereinafter referred to as 'dealer'), was appointed as dealer by the Corporation. The dealer on 6-6-80 and 7-6-80 deposited certain amount for the purchase of fertilizers and the orders were issued by the sale depost bearing No...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Kumar Vs. Kunwar Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: 2(2000)ACC684
ORDERV.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 13.9.1996, in Motor Accident Claims Case No. 35/91, by Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Multai, Betul, whereby an award of Rs. 46,918/- has been granted in favour of the claimant/respondent No. 1.2. It is now not in dispute that the claimant/respondent No. 1 is an Advocate. He was driving his motorcycle No. BTA 7332 from Amla to Multal, his motorcycle was dashed by another motorcycle No. ADG 4195, driven by respondent No. 2 Shiv Shankar.3. The claimant/appellant filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' for short), claiming compensation on account of the said accident. He averred that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of motorcycle by respondent No. 2. It was also averred that the said motorcycle was owned by the appellant. He suffered fractures and had to undergo treatment for about three months, resulting in loss of e...
Tag this Judgment!BhaktIn Bai and ors. Vs. Jarnail Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: 2(2000)ACC781
ORDERV.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 12.5.1997 in Claim Case No. 1/4 by IInd Additional Motor Claims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon, whereby the application for adjournment filed on behalf of the appellants/claimants was dismissed, so also the claim petition itself.2. It appears that the appellants/claimants have filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation on account of death of Ramesh Kumar in a motor accident arising out of collision of two trucks. The appellants/claimants adduced some evidence, but on a subsequent opportunity and hearing for adducing further evidence, the appellants were absent. Their Counsel filed an application for adjournment as well as an opportunity to lead additional evidence. That application was dismissed by the impugned order and consequently the claim petition was also dismissed.3. Learned Counsel for appellants has mainly urged that, even if the prayer and application for adjournme...
Tag this Judgment!Damodar Prasad and Another Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT79
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. Invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court of petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari for quashment of the impugned orders contained in Annexures 8 and 9 and further for quashing of the proceeding of the revenue appeal No. 35/89-90 pending before the respondent No. 2 namely Sub-Divisional Officer, Bareli.2. The facts as have been unfolded arc that the petitioners, resident of village Deori Distt. Raisen, were permitted by the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Deori to construct the house in Abadi land situated at village Deori. The said permission was taken in the month of September, 1994. On the basis of the aforesaid permission the huts were constructed by the petitioners and subsequently the Patta was granted to them on 10-5-88 and 10-3-89 respectively by the concerned Tahsildar in consultation with the Sarpanch under Gramin Avas Yojna. The said certificates have been brought on record as Annexures P-3 and P-4. It is stated in the writ petition that the l...
Tag this Judgment!Tulsiram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: II(2000)DMC420
S.P. Khare, J. 1. Appellant Tulsiram has been convicted under Sections 306 and 498A, I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and one year respectively. He has also been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- for the first offence and Rs. 200/-for the second offence.2. Deceased Siyawati was married to accused Tulsiram in Pat form six years before her death. She was early married to some other man. Her dead body was recovered from a well in village Chunai on 25.4.1996. She was living with her husband in that village. The finding of the Trial Court that Siyawati committed suicide by jumping into the well is unassailable.3. The point for determination is whether the appellant has abetted commission of suicide by her and whether he subjected her to cruelty within the meaning of Explanation (a) to Section 498A, I.P.C. The Trial Court has answered this point in the affirmative. After hearing the learned Counsel for both the sides the evidence on record has been scanned by ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mamta Jaiswal Vs. Rajesh Jaiswal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: II(2000)DMC170; 2000(3)MPLJ100
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J. 1. The petitioner Mamta Jaiswal has acquired qualification as MSc. M.C. M.Ed, and was working in Gulamnabi Azad. College of Education, Pusad, Distt. Yeotmal (MHS). The husband Rajesh Jaiswal is sub-engineer serving in Pimampur factory. The order which is under challenge by itself shows that Mamta Jaiswal, the wife was earning Rs. 4,000/- as salary when she was in service in the year 1994. The husband Rajesh Jaiswal is getting salary of Rs. 5,852/-. The Matrimonial Court awarded alimony of Rs. 800/- to Mamta Jaiswal per month as pendente lite alimony, Rs. 400/- per month has been awarded to their daughter Ku, Diksha Jaiswal. Expenses necessary for litigation has been awarded to the tune of Rs. 1,500/-. The Matrimonial Court has directed Rajesh Jaiswal to pay travelling expenses to Mamta Jaiswal whenever sheattends Court for hearing of them matrimorial petition pending between them. Matrimonial petition has been filed by husband Rajesh Jaiswal for getting divorce fro...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrika Prasad Tiwari and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT298; 2000(3)MPLJ223
ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, prayer made by the petitioners is to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the orders of the Revenue Courts (Annexures P-8, P-12, P-13, P-15, P-17 and P-18) whereby Revenue Courts have concurrently held that the tank recorded as Khasra Nos. 1483/1, 1482, 1554/2, 1555 and 1954/1 had vested in the State by virtue of Section 251 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code. Further prayer made by the petitioners is for quashing the notice dated 19-6-1989 (Annexure P-19) whereby the petitioners have been asked to be present at the time of inspection of the tank.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioners were the proprietors of village Dhaneli, tahsil Baloda Bazar, district Raipur. After coming into force of the Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated L...
Tag this Judgment!Lachmandas Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2000
Reported in: AIR2000MP329; 2000(3)MPHT246; 2000(3)MPLJ21
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated April 8, 1994, passed by the M.P. Arbitration Tribunal, Bhopal in Reference Case No. 29/1993, whereby the claim of the applicant has been rejected on the ground of limitation.2. The respondents claim pertains to recovery of Rs. 1,14,960/- arising out of works contract covered by agreement No. 13/ 1984-85 for execution of certain works mentioned in the contract agreement.3. The grievance of the applicant Is that the contractual work was completed on June 30. 1986 and the final bill prepared in May, 1991, but the respondents wrongly withheld the amount of Rs.61,200/- without notice to him. The applicant made several oral request for release of withheld amount, but all in vain. Accordingly, he submitted claims under Clause G.C. 51 of the agreement before the Executive Engineer on June 30, 1992, when no decision was given within 30 days, appeal was filed on July 20, 1992,before the Superintending Engineer, who also fai...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Satish Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2000
Reported in: 2001ACJ1568; AIR2001MP41
Arun Mishra, J.1. The order passed in this appeal shall also govern the disposal of M.A. Nos, 497/99, 463/99 and 412/99 as these appeals arise out of the same accident which took place on 4th May, 1992. M.A. Nos. 496 and 497 of 1999 have been filed by the Union of India against the awards passed in Claim Case Nos. 30/94 and 31/94 and M.A. Nos. 463/99 and 412/99 have been filed by Oriental Insurance Company against the same very awards passed in the aforesaid claim cases on 5-1-1999.2. Two claim petitions were filed. Claim Petition No. 30/94 was filed by claimants legal representatives of deceased Sukesh Verma, namely, Smt. Pushpabai, Mohit and Anju, being widow, son and daughter respectively of deceased Sukesh Verma. Sukesh was driving the motor cycle involved in the accident in question. The Pillion rider on the motor cycle at the time of accident was Dashrath who also died in the accident along with Sukesh. The claimants legal representatives of Dashrath, namely, Chandrakala, Ku. Ani...
Tag this Judgment!Nemichand Gangwal and anr. Vs. Harish Kumar Jhanwar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)MPHT194
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The petitioner as plaintiff filed civil suit for recovery of Rs. 1,09,309/-against the defendant/non-applicant in the Court of VIIth Additional District Judge, Bhopal. It was pleaded in the plaint that the plaintiff had a number of share certificates which he wished to dispose of and for this purpose contacted the defendant who dealt with the purchase of shares. After due discussion the petitioner handed over the share certificates to the defendant and the defendant agreed for buying the shares for a total of Rs. 1,23,143/- and the defendant handed over a bill signed by him to the petitioner. Since the share certificates pertained to different companies, the defendant handedover different cheques drawn on different banks. However, when the petitioners deposited the cheques in his account in the State Bank of India only one cheque amounting to Rs. 36,562.50 was debited and the rest were dishonoured.2. In this obtaining factual matrix the petitioner filed a complai...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »