Madhya Pradesh Court June 2001 Judgments
Smt. Padma Raje and Others Vs. Smt. Gangabai and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT441; 2001(3)MPLJ335
S.P. Khare, J. 1. This is plaintiffs' second appeal under Section 100, CPC. The following substantial question of law survives for decision after the remand of the case by the Supreme Court:-- 'Whether the burden of proof of legal necessity has been legally discharged by the defendants' alienees ?' 2. The facts relevant for the decision of the question referred above are that Nannu Singh was the holder of about 48 acres of land. He died in the year 1898 leaving behind his widow Pyari Bahu, She sold six acres of land of khasra No. 23 by registered sale-deed dated 28-10-1955 (Ex. D-1) to KunjanSingh. She was admittedly limited owner of the property left by her husband. This alienation has been challenged by the reversioners of her husband after her death in the year 1961. The Trial Court held that this alienation by the Hindu widow was not for legal necessity. This findings has been reversed by the First Appellate Court. Relying upon the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Kamla...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Devi Vs. Firm Tikayaram Lekhraj Batra and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2001
Reported in: AIR2002MP47; 2002(1)MPHT74; 2001(3)MPLJ153
ORDERS.S. Jha, J.1. This revision is filed against the order dated 2-3-1998 passed by Fourth Civil Judge Class-1, Gwalior in Civil Suit No. 63-B/94.2. Petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of amount against the respondents with the averment that respondent No. 1 is a proprietorship firm and respondent No. 2 is its sole proprietor. A loan of Rs. 20,000/- was advanced by the plaintiff on 9-9-91 on interest at the rate of 1.25% per month and for the aforesaid transaction a pronote was executed by the defendants in favour of plaintiff. Since the amount and interest was not paid, the suit was filed. The claim of the plaintiff was denied and the defendants denied having received money from the plaintiff. The petitioner placed reliance upon a document, which is written as 'Hundi'. When the document was being exhibited in evidence, the defendants raised a preliminary objection that the document is a pronote and is inadmissible in evidence.3. Counsel for the plaintiff submitted that this doc...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Nirmala Bai Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT82
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1.By this revision applicant Smt. Nirmalabai seeks to impugn the judgment dated 12-2-2001 passed by 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Neemuch, in Cr. Appeal No. 168/98 as also the order dated 16-5-2001 passed by IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Neemuch in S.T. No. 76/2001.2. By the judgment dated 12-2-2001 in Appeal No. 168/98, the learned ASJ has set-aside the conviction, and sentence passed against the applicant under Section 304A of IPC by the Trial Magistrate and remanded the case back to the Magistrate with the direction that it be committed to the Court of Sessions for trial under Sections 314 and 315 of IPC. The order dated 16-5-2001 is passed by the ASJ after committal of the said case by the Magistrate, framing charges under Sections 314 and 315 of IPC against the applicant.3. Applicant Smt. Nirmalabai at the relevant time was working as a Nurse at village Sarvania, Dist. Neemuch. One Shantabai (since deceased) who was having two months pregnancy, accompanied by her husba...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Smt. Vijaya Kothalkar Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)MPHT295; 2001(3)MPLJ469
ORDER1. The petitioner is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and illegality of the judgment and order passed by the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur (hereinafter referred to as 'SAT' for convenience) in the matter of Original Application No. 335/99, dated 23-3-1999.2. Some facts need to be stated for the purpose of understanding the matter in better way. The petitioner (Dr. Smt. Vijaya Kothalkar) had been working on the post of Assistant Professor from 18-9-74 in the pay-scale of Rs. 620-1300 and 700-1300. She had acquired the seniority on 18-9-85 and, therefore, she was sanctioned two advanced increments of Rs. 50/- in the aforesaid pay-scale by the Principal, Government Girls P.G. College, Ujjain (hereinafter referred to as the concerned College for convenience). The same order was passed on 7-10-1985. The said advanced increments were given to her in view of the recommendation of the 'Pande Pay Commission' and in accordance with the General Administration Depart...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Nirmalabai and anr. Vs. Dr. Omprakash and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2001
Reported in: II(2001)DMC593
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 8.1.2000 passed by 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Mhow, in Cr. Revision No. 439/2000 dismissing the same as barred by time.2. Applicant No. 1 Smt. Nirmalabai is the wife of respondent No. 1 Dr. Omprakash and applicant No. 2 Vishal and respondent No. 2 Nirdosh are their sons. The applicants made an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mhow, for grant of maintenance by respondent No. 1. Their application was dismissed by the Magistrate vide order dated 18.2.2000 in Misc. Cr. Case No. 13/98. Revision preferred against this order was dismissed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, as barred by limitation. The application made under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also dismissed by the same order dated 8.1.2001 which is sought to be impugned in this petition.3. The revision preferred before the Sessions Court below was delayed by 157 days. The applicants a...
Tag this Judgment!Hemant Kulshrestha Vs. Smt. Pushpa Kulshrestha and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT239
ORDERS.S. Jha, J. 1. Proceedings for grant of succession certificate were initiated by the respondents, claiming themselves to be legal representatives of Late Ravi Prakash Kulshrestha. Petitioner claims to be brother of Late Ravi Prakash Kulshrestha. Ravi Prakash Kulshrestha was holding the post of Upper Division Clerk in the Office of Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Shiv-puri. While in service he died. The amount of Rs. 1,13,932/- towards provident-fund, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards insurance, and Rs. 34,278/- towards gratuity, totalling Rs. 2,48,210/-, is to be paid to the legal representatives of deceased Ravi Prakash. The mother of Ravi Prakash died on 2-12-1997. Respondent No. 1 pleaded that she is the legally married wife of deceased Ravi Prakash and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor daughters of Late Ravi Prakash. It is also undisputed that a civil suit for divorce between Ravi Prakash and Smt. Pushpa was pending, which has been withdrawn. Ravi Prakash had nominated ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Shree Synthetics Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2001
Reported in: 2002(142)ELT529(MP)
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. The appellants in both these appeals are hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court by which the learned Judge decided W.P. Nos. 1333/97 [2000 (122) E.L.T. 338 (M.P.)]and 849/98.2. Shri Patankar while assailing the correctness and legality of the said judgments and orders submitted that the learned Judge did not take into consideration the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Suptd. of Central Excise, Jammu v. J.K. Cigarettes reported in 1996 (84) E.L.T. 412 (S.C). He submitted further that in view of the provisions of Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the duress, issued for the purpose of collection of Revenue by the Central Excise Department cannot be stayed. He submitted that the learned judge has done the same and, therefore, the said judgments and order need to be set aside by allowing these appeals.3. Shri Chaphekar pointed...
Tag this Judgment!Maharaj Singh Vs. Ramratan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT385; 2001(3)MPLJ337
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is defendant's second appeal under Section 100, CPC. Arguments on the question of admission heard.2. There is a concurrent finding of fact of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court that the house in dispute and the land bearing Khasra No. 43 on which it is standing belong to plaintiff Ramratan as these were allotted to his father in the family partition and defendant Maharaj Singh occupied the house three years prior to the institution of the suit in the year 1985 with the permission of the plaintiff. On these findings the suit for possession has been decreed.3. In this second appeal it has been argued on behalf of the appellant that the substantial question of law which arises for decision is whether the suit was barred under Section 32 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 in view of the 'Panch Faisla' dated 25-9-1973 (Ex. D-1). This question was the subject matter of Issue No. 1 before the Trial Court. The finding on this issue is that this 'Panch Faisla' h...
Tag this Judgment!National Steel Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(77)ECC621; 2002(139)ELT529(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. By filing this writ under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner in substance seeks issuance of writ of mandamus claiming refund of Rs. 22,85,790/- deposited by the petitioner towards purported demand of interest under the Customs Act raised by the respondents (Customs Authorities) for release of certain goods kept in warehouse and seeks to question the legality of order (Annexure J) passed by Assistant Collector rejecting the claim of petitioner for refund of interest amount. In order to appreciate the grievance urged by the parties, it is necessary to state the facts-which are brought on record by the parties.2. Petitioner is a limited Company registered as such under the Companies Act. It is engaged in the manufacturing activities and has a plant at Ghatabillod in District Dhar. It is the case of petitioner that for the 1988 -99, the Government had formulated the policy of Import-Export pursuant to which any manufacturer engaged in ex...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›