Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
Rajesh Goel Vs. Smt. Mullo and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)MPHT520; 2000(2)MPLJ445
S.P. Srivastava, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant as well as the learned counsel representing the defendants-respondents.2. Perused the record.3. The plaintiff-appellant had filed a suit being Original Civil Suit No. 28-A of 1984 against Kamarlal Soni praying for a decree of his eviction from the premises in dispute which was under his tenancy and further a decree for recovery of arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation. The aforesaid suit had been filed on the grounds envisaged under Sections 12 (1) (a) and 12 (1) (o) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act. The plaintiff had alleged that the defendant, Kamarlal, had defaulted in the payment of rent for the period subsequent to 31-10-1981.4. The trial Court on an appraisal of oral and documentary evidence brought on record came to the conclusion that relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the plaintiff and the defendant and the premises in dispute had been let out to the defendant at a re...
Charan Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4315; 2000(3)MPLJ188
R.S. Garg, J.1. Charansingh, father of the detenu Rinkusingh by this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the correctness, validity and propriety of the Order No. 5/NSA/99 dated 17-8-1999 passed by respondent No. 3-District Magistrate, Katni and the intimation dated 18-8-1999 sent by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Madhavnagar, whereunder petitioner's son Rinkusingh has been directed to be detained and kept in Central Jail, Jabalpur under Section 3, Sub-section (2) of the National Security Act, 1980.2. According to the petitioner his son Rinkusingh (hereinafter referred as detenu) is a peace loving citizen and is not involved in criminal activities nor is menace to the public safety, public order and tranquillity, therefore, his detention under the orders impugned is bad, illegal, contrary to the provisions of law and deserves to be quashed.3. From the original records and the pleadings of the parties in the writ petition it appears th...
Parwati Devi and ors. Vs. Manager, Ore Mining Company and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ913
V.K. Agarwal, J.1. It appears that the appellants-claimants have filed an application claiming compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Durg, on account of death of Chaturi Chouhan.2. The claimants are L.Rs. of deceased Chaturi Chouhan. The appellant No. 1 is his widow while the remaining appellants, some of whom are minors, are his children. It also appears that the claim petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 23.3.96. On account of dismissal as above a restoration application under Order 9, Rule 9 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code was filed by the claimantsappellants. That application for restoration has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 11.2.1998.3. While dismissing the application for restoration, the learned Tribunal has taken note of the fact that the appellants-claimants have shown negligence and have been unable to establish sufficient cause for their non-appearance. It has also been pointed out that the claim petition was earlier...
Surendra Singh Vs. M.P.S.R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2000
Reported in: 1(2001)ACC41
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. Claimant, a victim of accident and suffered injuries is dissatisfied with what is awarded to him by the Claims Tribunal. The Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,000/-. The impugned award is dated 24.1.1997 passed by M.A.C.T., Mandleshwar in Claim Case 41/91.2. In short the case of claimant is that he suffered injuries on his body while travelling on motor-cycle with one of his friend Prithviraj Singh who was driving the said motor-cycle. According to claimant, the bus belonging to respondent dashed with their motor-cycle resulting in accident and inflicting injuries on the body of claimant as also his friend. The incident occurred on 19.10.1990.3. The claimant sought to prove the injuries suffered by him by leading evidence whatever he had in his possession. In the opinion of learned Member of Tribunal, the claimant failed to prove the injuries. Its resultant loss suffered by him so as to prove the quantum of damages to which he is legally entitled. The Tri...
CaptaIn P.K. Rekwal Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT72
ORDERS.S. Saraf, J. 1. This Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 read with Sections 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and other three Criminal Revisions : (i) Cr. Rev. No. 84/2000 (Major E. Kumar v. Union of India through C.B.I.), (ii) Cr. Rev. No. 177/2000 (Lieutenant Colonel J.S. Virdi v. Union of India through C.B.I.) and (iii) Criminal Revision No. 178/2000(Subedar N. Prasad v. Union of India through C.B.I.) arise out of the common order dated 4-11-1999 passed by the learned Special Judge (CBI), Jabalpur in Special Case No. 7/99 framing charge against all the petitioners for offence punishable under Sections 120B and 420 of IPC and under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2)of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, therefore, all the four revision petitions are being considered and disposed of by the common order.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are these:-- The petitioners are the worki...
Bengal Trading Syndicate Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: AIR2001MP71; 2000(2)MPHT499
Arun Mishra, J.1. The present appeal has been filed by M/s. Bengal Trading Syndicate, the appellant, aggrieved by the order passed by the District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 33-A of 1994 whereby the award passed by the Arbitrator with respect to claims under Item Nos. 3, 5, 31 (a) and 32 was set aside and the award in respect of other claims of the appellant was made rule of the Court. It was ordered that in respect of Claim No. 4 an amount of Rs. 25,584.91, p., in respect of Claim No. 7 an amount of Rs. 1,29,645.00, in respect ofClaim No. 36 an amount of Rs. 50,932.48 p. in respect of Claim No. 9 an amount of Rs. 13,455/-, in respect of Claim No. 12 an amount of Rs. 29,748.54 and in respect of Claim No. 33(a). 33(b) and 37 an amount of Rs. 34,560/- shall be paid by the Union of India to the appellant. It was further directed that the Union of India shall pay to the appellant interest at the rate of Rs. 12% per annum from 14-6-1990 to 24-8-1994 on all awards except award in resp...
Malloo Gir Goswami Vs. Chaturbhuj Rai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ500
V.K. Agrawal, J.1. Heard finally with the consent of the parties.The appellant/claimant, father of the deceased, filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) for grant of compensation on account of accidental death of his son, Shiv Kumar with truck bearing registration No. CPT 2561. The said truck was owned by respondent No. 2 and its driver was respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 3 admittedly insured the said vehicle. The appellant/claimant also filed an application under Section 140 of the Act for grant of interim award on the principle of no fault liability.2. The averments were that one of the tyres of the truck had punctured; the truck was standing on the side of the road. Deceased Shiv Kumar came on a motor cycle, dashed against the truck and sustained fatal injuries. It also appears that respondent No. 1 was prosecuted regarding the said incident and he pleaded guilty and was accordingly punished.3. The lear...
Madan Rao Jagtap Vs. Rajshree Plastic Pipe Factory and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: I(2001)ACC8; 2002ACJ872
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This miscellaneous appeal is preferred by the claimant under Section 30 (wrongly typed as Section 30) of the Workmen's Compensation Act against an award dated 30.12.1996 passed by the Labour Court (Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation), Mandsaur in Claim Case No. l/WC/86/non-fatal. By the impugned award, the learned Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation has dismissed the claim petition of appellant (claimant) on the ground that it is preferred beyond the period of limitation. This appeal is to challenge this finding.2. In short, the facts leading to this appeal are that appellant (a worker) while working in the factory belonging to respondent on 31.7.1984, met with an accident. As a result of accident, the appellant suffered injuries in his left hand as he lost his fingers. According to appellant his left hand has become totally useless as he cannot use it for any purpose.3. This led to the filing of claim petition by the appellant (claimant) before the Commissioner, Wo...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gajrajsingh Nathusingh Hatpipla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2000
Reported in: [2000]246ITR343(MP)
1. This application for reference is made by the Department against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 460/Ind of 1989 assessment year 1983-84 dated June 27, 1991, whereby the Tribunal held that the penalty imposed by the Departmental authorities was wrong on the factual data contained in the Departmental order and in the record whereas the record shows that the certificate issued by the Mandi Committee upon which the Department relied on was on a wrong calculation. Apparently instead of 1444.83, 1397.67 quintals of purchase was done.2. On calculation of the details of the certificate, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that factually there is a mistake in totalling by the Mandi Committee, therefore, the amount arrived at by the assessee was not correct. Hence, the penalty could not have been imposed upon the non-applicant. Another point which the Tribunal held against the Department is that the Departmental authorities who had initiated the proceeding and who h...
Prestige Metals P. Ltd. Vs. Cegat, New Delhi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2000
Reported in: 2001(74)ECC559; 2002(141)ELT335(MP)
N.K. Jain, J. 1. Both these petitions involve similar question of law and were, therefore, heard as connected matters.2. Petitioners are aggrieved by dismissal of their appeals by CEGAT, mainly on the ground of non-compliance of the provision of Section 35F regarding deposit of the duty demanded and the penalty levied.3. It is significant to note that petitioners' applications filed under the proviso to Section 35F praying for dispensing with pre-deposit of the dues and the penalty were dismissed by the concerning Appellate Authorities. In the matter giving rise to Writ Petition No. 783/2000, the petitioners preferred Writ Petition before the main seat, Jabalpur, while in the matter giving rise to W.P. No. 583/2000, the petition was filed before this Bench. Learned Single Judge at Jabalpur passed an interim order dated 7-5-99 that 'if within a period of three weeks from today the petitioner deposits 1/4th of the amount of duty, the appeal filed by the petitioner shall not be dismissed ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »