Madhya Pradesh Court June 2000 Judgments
Shiv Prasad Tiwari and Another Vs. Jagdish Prasad Patel and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT319; 2001(2)MPLJ634
ORDERS.S. Saraf, J. 1. Heard.2. This is a criminal revision under Section 397 read with Sections 401 and 482, Cr.P.C against the order dated 3-5-2000 passed by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Chhattarpur in Sessions Trial No. 256/99 allowing the application filed under Section 319, Cr.P.C. and thereby arraigning the petitioners in the array of accused.3. The facts giving rise to this petition are these :--Two persons namely Shankar Bharti and Nandu @ Nandkishorc were prosecuted for offence under Sections 341, 323, 325, 327 and 307 read with Section 34 of IPC on the basis of a report lodged by complainant Jagdish Prasad, the respondent No. 1 who has not yet been issued notice. During theexamination of the complainant Jagdish Prasad in the Trial Court, he stated that the present petitioners along with the above two accused were also involved in the commission of above offence whereupon the learned prosecutor filed an application under Section 319, Cr.P.C. for arraigning the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Nirmalabai Vs. Hukamsingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)MPHT432
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner calls in question the Order dated 20-4-99, passed by respondent No. 4, the Revenue Commissioner, Ujjain Division, Ujjain, vide Annexure P-8.2. The dispute pertains to the inclusion of name of petitioner in the voter list for the elections under the provisions of the M.P. Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 and the M.P. Krishi Upaj Mandi (Mandi Samiti Ka Nirvachan) Rules, 1997 (for short 'Mandi Act' & 'Nirvachan Rules' respectively).3. The said revision arose from the Order dated 15-4-99 (Annexure P-6), passed in appeal by the Appellate Authority (respondent No. 3) in affirmance of the Order dated 13-4-99 (Annexure P-5) of the Registering Officer (respondent No. 2), dismissing objection of respondent No. 1 to the inclusion of petitioner's name in the voter list, under the provisions of the Nirvachan Rules, 1997. Against the Order (P-6), respondent No. 1 preferred revision before respon...
Tag this Judgment!Baldev Singh Bhatia Vs. the Commissioner, Nagar Palika Nigam and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2000
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT206
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. The sole point involved in this revision petition is whether the refusal of prayer to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') by the learned Second Additional District Judge, Raipur in Civil Suit No. 21-A/99 is justified.2. A brief reference to the factual aspects as stated by the parties would suffice.3. The non-applicant No. 3, Saddruddin Farista, instituted the aforesaid suit for declaration that the lease hold rights in respect of the suit plot are valid and subsist and the letters dated 2-4-99 and 11-6-99 issued by the Defendant No. 1, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, are without any legal authority and sanction, and further for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from invalidating, interfering with or disturbing the lease hold interest of the plaintiff in respect of the suit plot without due process of law. It is setforth in the plaint that the defendant No. 1 owns the plot ...
Tag this Judgment!Hajaria Vs. Rajendra Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ861
A.M. Sapre, J.1. Claimants who are legal representatives of one Hitu have filed this appeal claiming enhancement of the compensation awarded to them by the learned Tribunal. In all a total sum of Rs. 5,000 only was awarded by way of compensation for the death of Hitu in an accident. The learned Tribunal passed an award jointly and severally against all the respondents (non-applicants). The impugned award is dated 28.6.1993. It is passed by M.A.C.T., Sendhwa in Claim Case No. 5 of 1992.2. On 9.3.1986 Hitu was going on road when the respondent No. 1 (defendant No. 1) came on motor cycle from the opposite side and dashed to Hitu. As a result of impact, Hitu died after some time in the hospital. This led to filing of claim petition by the present appellants who are legal representatives of late Hitu, claiming compensation amounting to Rs. 82,000. In the claim petition, the claimants arrayed 4 respondents as 4 non-applicants on the assertion that motor cycle in question was owned by defenda...
Tag this Judgment!Bhawani Traders Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT166
ORDERS.S. Saraf, J. 1. Heard.2. Learned counsel for both the sides submit that the matter can be heard and disposed of finally.3. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been directed against the order dated 12-10-1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon in Criminal Revision No. 119/99 confirming the order dated 23-8-99 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon in Remand Proceedings of Crime No. 51/99 of Police Station, Mohla District Rajnandgaon rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for releasing the vehicle bearing egistration No. MP-23 D-4860 'Swaraj Mazda' on Supurdnama.4. The said truck was seized by the concerned police for offence under Section 66/192 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short the 'Act') and Sections 6, 7 and 11 of M.P. Krishik Pashu Parirakshan Adhiniyam, 1959 (for short the 'Adhiniyam'). The said truck was registered in the name of Bhawani Traders, Station Road, Dhamtari. Th...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sohanbai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)MPHT195
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. Heard.2. Opponents No. 1 to 4 are the claimants. Opponents No. 5 Munawar Hussain and opponent No. 6 Shakir Hussain are the owners of vehicle involved in the accident in which Champa Lal, who was driving the said vehicle, died.3. A claim was preferred before the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation, Ujjain. The said Commissioner passed the Award in favour of opponents 1 to 4 and directed the Insurance Company, opponents 5 and 6 to deposit the amount of compensation of Rs. 1,01,664.00. He further directed that the opponents 1 to 4 were entitled to get interest on the said amount @ 9% per annum. He further directed that in the event of default in depositing the said amount within the prescribed time limit the claimants would be entitled to get penalty of 25% of the amount of compensation as well as the interest.4. An application was moved by the opponents No. 1 to 4 making a prayer that the Insurance Co. and opponents No. 5 and 6 did not pay the said amount of compens...
Tag this Judgment!Makhanlal Sahu and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)MPHT393
ORDERA.K. Mishra, J.1. The petitioners (appellants herein) filed writ petition before this Court challenging the notices Annexures P-2, P-3, P-4 and P-5 by which it was proposed to retire them from service on attaining the age of 60 years. The petitioners are Class IV servants in the Municipal Corporation, Durg. They alleged that on 24th of March, 1999, the Government has taken a decision to enhance the age of retirement of Class IV Government Employees from 60 years to 62 years. It was contended by the petitioners that when earlier retirement age was enhanced from 58 to 60 years by the Government, the Corporation has also adopted the same and enhanced the age of retirement of such employees to 60 years.2. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition on the ground that age enhanced by the Government for retirement of Government servants does not become automatically applicable in the case of local authorities like Municipal Corporation. The learned counsel for the appellants has fra...
Tag this Judgment!Satya Bhan Singh Narwariya Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)MPHT296
ORDER1. Heard.2. The petitioner by this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has challenges the order dated 5-4-2000 passed by the M.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1461/1999 rejecting the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment.3. One Antram Singh died in the year 1976 while he was employed as Vaccinator under the employment of the respondents, leaving his widow and daughter named Gunamala who was aged about 6 years, at the time of death of Antram Singh. The widow of the deceased Antram Singh did not seek her appointment on compassionate ground as she was not interested at that time. Her daughter was minor and after attaining majority she herself did not seekthe appointment. She married and thereafter son-in-law wanted appointment on compassionate ground. As the matter was filed before the Tribunal earlier and as per order Annexure A-13, the appointment was refused.4. In O.A. No. 1460/1997 notices were issued but return in the ease had not...
Tag this Judgment!Dhanya Kumar JaIn Vs. Mata Prasad Gupta and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2000
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT169; 2001(2)MPLJ497
S.C. Pandey, J. 1. This is plaintiff s appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 23-7-1992 passed by Xth Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Appeal No. 3-A/1991 reversing the judgment and decree dated 10-1-1991 passed by IInd Civil Judge Class II, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 57/89.2. The appellant filed a suit against the respondent for ejectment and arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 375/- between the period of 1-11-87 to 31-1-1988. It appears that the grounds for ejectment were under Sections 12 (1) (a), 12 (1) (b) and 12 (1) (c) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act (hereforth the Act). So far ground for ejectment for non-payment of it arrears of rent is concerned it was alleged that the respondent had not paid Rs. 375/-despite service of notice of demand, even after two months of receipt of notice till the filing of the suit. The ground for ejectment under Section 12(1) (b) of the Act was pleaded by sa...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ashabai and ors. Vs. Motilal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2000
Reported in: 2(2000)ACC578
Shambhoo Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed by the claimants against the award dated 25.9.1995 passed by IInd Addl. M.A.C.T. Neemuch, in Claim Case No. 20/91 whereby compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum was awarded.2. The case of the appellants-claimants was that on 19.6.1991 the deceased Ganpat was working on truck No. M.B.U. 4544 as cleaner. This truck was driven by respondent No. 1, the owner in rash and negligent mariner, as a result of which it turned turtle. The deceased sustained injuries and died. The claimants filed claim case seeking compensation of Rs. 6,45,000/-. The respondents resisted the claim. The learned Tribunal after recording evidence held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of truck by respondent No. 1 and awarded compensation as stated above. However, the Tribunal exonerated respondent No. 2 Insurance Company on the ground that respondent No. 1 was not having valid and effective driving licence.3. At ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »