Madhya Pradesh Court July 2000 Judgments
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Shyam Sunder Dixit and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-17-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ1753; 2001(1)MPHT211
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal challenges the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, dated 29-2-2000 in Claim Case No. 77 of 1998.2. On 21-6-1998, Akhilesh Kumar Dixit (deceased) was going along with others in a bus M.P. 23/J-0409 from Nagpur to Bhilai. The driver of the bus was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently. As a result, the rear part of the bus struck with another vehicle. The deceased was sitting in the last seat of the bus and as a result of this accident, there was big jerk due to which the deceased sustained injuries on his head. He was taken to Government Hospital, Rajnandgaon but on the way he died. He used to work in Bhilai Steel Plant and his monthly salary was Rs. 6,900.00 apart from yearly bonus of Rs. 6,500.00. At the time of accident, the deceased was 28 years old and was likely to get promotion six times taking the salary to atleast Rs. 20,000-25,000/-. Against different heads, the claim of Rs. 34,30,000.00 has been raised.3. The respondents/...
Tag this Judgment!Sitabai Kataria Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-17-2000
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT156
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1. Petitioner-Sitabai by this petition has called in question the order dated 24-1-2000 passed by the State Government, Department of 'Nagariya Prashasan & Vikas', Bhopal, removing the petitioner from the office of the President, Nagar Panchayat (Municipality), Badnawar.2. The impugned order (Annexure P-17) is made by taking recourse to Section 41-A of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). The office of the President, Nagar Panchayat, Badnawar was reserved for a woman belonging to Scheduled Tribe. Admittedly, the petitioner is a Scheduled Tribe woman, resident of Ward No. 6 of Badnawar town. After the elections for the said office, petitioner-Sitabai was declared elected by the Returning Officer vide certificate dated 28-12-1999 (Annexure P-9). However, before she could assume charge of the office a complaint was made by Koksingh - the Intervener herein that election to the said office has been contested not by petitioner- Sitabai but one by Nirma...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Awdhesh Kumar Tiwari and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-17-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ72
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabal-pur, dated 23.10.1996.2. On 4.4.1992, minibus No. MKK 5103, owned by Awdhesh Kumar Tiwari and driven by Anil Kumar Raikwar, insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. hit Rampratap, aged 48, near Ordnance Factory, Khamaria. At the time of accident, the deceased was riding a bicycle and the bus hit him from behind. Claimants submit that at the time of incident, deceased was earning Rs. 2,000 inclusive of other funds. Out of this income, he was supporting his family. In this accident, he sustained head injury, was admitted in the military hospital and died on 8.4.1992. This accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the bus by the driver. Claim for Rs. 7,70,000 has been preferred.3. Respondents have denied the allegations. They submit that the deceased was responsible for the accident since he was driving on the wrong side of the road. It is admitted that t...
Tag this Judgment!State of M.P. and Others Vs. Smt. Champa Soni and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT208; 2001(2)MPLJ333
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This petition challenges the order of the State Administrative Tribunal dated March 25, 2000 passed in O.A. N. 693 of 1999.2. The respondent No. 1 Smt. Champa Soni was trained by the Integrated Women and Child Development Project. Some time later, she was promoted to the post of Gram Sewika. She was sent for training and then promoted as Trained Bal Sewika in 1971. She got regular increments from time to time and was posted at Narayanpur, District Bastar from 19-11-1982. Her services were absorbed in Panchayat and Social Welfare Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh on 2-6-1983 (Annexure P-2). After absorption, the respondent No. 1 was promoted and posted as Trained Gram Sewika and was again promoted to the post of Supervisor in 1988.3. Claim of the respondent No. 1 is that her services should be counted from 28-7-1962 and not from 2-6-1983. The State appears to have calculated the pension of the respondent No. 1 from 2-6-19S3 on the ground that the respon...
Tag this Judgment!S.P. Anand and Another Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)MPHT256; 2001(2)MPLJ448
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J. 1. The State of M.P. has filed the list of women who are subjected to the rape as alleged by them or prosecution. Shri Anand submitted that the women who are subjected to rape should be given compensation keeping in view the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Bodhistava Gautam v. Subra Chakraborty, reported in (1996) 1 SCC 490 and Chairman Railway Board v. Chandrimadas, reported in (2000) 2 SCC 465. Shri Vyas submitted that the M.P. Government has chalked out a policy by which the victims of rape coming from the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes are given compensation of the sum of Rs. 40,000/- irrespective of the decision of the Court. He submitted that the State Government is taking care of the victims of rape and, therefore, no fresh directions need to be given for the purpose of giving compensation to all the victims as prayed by the petitioner.2. The judgments cited by Shri S.P. Anand will have to be obeyed as they indicate the law of the land. ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajkumar Patni Vs. Smt. Manorama Patni
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-2000
Reported in: II(2000)DMC702
A.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this appeal shall also govern the disposal of another connected first appeal being F.A. No. 319/94 as both these appeals arise out of a common judgment and the decree. In fact they are in the nature of cross appeals - one filed by plaintiff and other by defendant. The present first appeal under Section 96 of C.P. Code is by the defendant (husband) against the judgment and decree dated 27.6.1990 passed in C.S. No. 7/88 by 1st Additional District Judge, Shajapur. In order to appreciate the factual scenerio of this litigation, it is necessary to state the facts in brief.2. It is in fact an unfortunate litigation between the wife and husband. Plaintiff is the wife and husband is the defendant. Wife has sued her husband for return of her Stridhan property in specie, or in the alternatively its value which according to wife works out to Rs. 1,49,140/-. In short and in substance, the case of wife in her plaint was that she married to defendant on 27.2...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madhya Pradesh and ors. Vs. Ram Lakhan Lodhi and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2000
Reported in: 2001ACJ1276; [2001(89)FLR52]; (2001)ILLJ788MP
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the Order of Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Labour Court, Satna, dated July 31, 1997, in Case No. 8/WC Act F/1996.2. Kaushal Prasad Lodhi was daily wages worker with the appellants. He had been assigned the duty of melting tar coal for which he was paid Rs. SI for coming early to the place of duty so that the melted tar coal was available to other workmen engaged at the place of duty. On October 6, 1995, when he was between Mantola and Lakargawan Railway cabin, he was hit by a truck. As a result of this accident he received serious injuries. He was sent to District Hospital, Satna for treatment where he died.3. Claimants are parents of the deceased. They submit that deceased was their son who died during the course of employment. Respondents are responsible for the loss since they were dependent upon him. Deceased was earning Rs. 30/- per day and he was 20 years old. In addition to Rs. 30/, he was being paid Rs. 5/- for comin...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Singh Vs. Ratanlal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)MPHT425
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. The petition is decided finally at this stage for avoiding delay in disposal of the suit in context of which this Order has been passed.2. Shri Kutumble pointed out the averments made by opponents (original plaintiffs) in Para 2 schedule of the plaint wherein the area of land bearing survey Nos. 63, 65 has been shown as 4.31 acres. He pointed out averments in Para 3 of the plaint in the schedule where area of survey Nos. 63, 65 has been shown as 4.31 hectares. He further pointed out the schedule connected with Para 7 of the plaint wherein area of survey No. 63 has been shown 8.28 hectares and area of survey No. 65 has been mentioned as 8.26 hectares. By pointing out this sequence and details, Shri Kutumble submitted that when application was moved by the petitioner for better particulars in view of Order 6, Rule 5 C.P.C., the trial Court rejected it by coming to the conclusion that it is a matter pertaining to evidence. In this context while advancing the submiss...
Tag this Judgment!SamsuddIn Vs. Jagdish
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)MPHT421
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. In the interest of justice and for avoiding the obstruction to the hearing of the suit before the trial Court, this petition is decided hereby finally at motion hearing stage.2. The petitioner happens to be a plaintiff in the matter of Civil Suit No. 230-A/96. He appointed a person named Iqbalkhan as the holder of his general power of attorney to appear and act on his behalf in the matter of said suit before the trial Court i.e., Civil Judge Class I, Indore, who was to decide the said suit. On 5-2-99 he entered in the witness-box and the Court started recording his evidence. At that time the lawyer representing the opponents raised an objection that said Iqbalkhan was incompetent, to give evidence as he was the holder of General Power of Attorney of the present petitioner. The learned trial Judge after placing the reliance on the judgment of Rajasthan High Court (Single Bench) in the matter Ramprasad v. Harinarain and Ors., reported in AIR 1998 Raj 185. concluded...
Tag this Judgment!Sudhir Kumar and anr. Vs. Pramod Kumar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)MPHT162
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. Both the appeals (M.A. No. 985/98 - Sudhir Kumar v. Pramod Kumar and Anr., and M.A. No. 999/98 - Ramgopal v. Pramod Kumar and Anr.) are proposed to he decided by this common judgment, as the question for determination is almost the same arising out of the same accident, though the Claims Tribunal has decided by separate awards passed in Claim Case No. 15/96 and Claim Case No. 14/96.2. Sudhir Kumar and Ramgopal (father) were on Rajdoot Motorcycle. They were going to village Kamthi. On 25-10-1995 at about 5 p.m., when they reached near village Mahuwa, Pramod Kumar (non-claimant No. 1) driving the truck rashly and negligently, hit the motor-cycle. The claimants in both the cases, suffered injuries. Both the claimants were shifted to the Hospital at Pipariya, wherefrom they were shifted to Jabalpur and they were admitted in private hospital. Sudhir Kumar (Claimant) remained unconscious for 20 days due to head injury and also lost memory. That apart, there was fra...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »