Madhya Pradesh Court July 2001 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.
Mohanlal Vs. Mangilal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-17-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC34
ORDERS.B. Sakrikar, J.1. Applicant/Judgment-Debtor has directed this revision against the order dated 14.2.2000 passed by the MACT, Rajgargh District Bioara (Executing Court) thereby directing attachment and sale of the bus No. MBH-7035, in execution of the award passed in favour of N.A. 1 and 2.2. The learned Counsel for applicant submitted that before the attachment of the said bus, a show cause notice was issued to the applicant for furnishing the details with regard to the disputed bus. In reply to the notice, the applicant has filed the registration, insurance and the other papers with regard to the alleged bus. The papers filed before the Executing Court indicate that the applicant is not a registered owner of the bus in question. The bus is registered in the name of one Ramesh Chandra Bhavsar, a resident of Jeerapur. Even in view of the aforesaid facts, the Court ordered for the attachment of the said bus in execution of the award passed by the MACT against the applicant. The le...
State of M.P. Vs. Smt. Prem Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)MPHT244; 2001(3)MPLJ166
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J.1. Heard the learned Govt. Advocate for the appellant as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondent.2. The facts as brought on record indicate that the contesting respondent-Smt. Prema Bai had initiated the proceedings under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, challenging her termination from service with effect from 14-2-1982 whereupon on a reference having been made by the State Government, the Labour Court vide its award dated 3-10-91 had declared her termination to be illegal and issue a direction for her reinstatement in service providing further that so far as backwage was concerned, she would be entitled to 50% of the wages only.3. The workman respondent initiated proceedings under Section 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 registered as Case No. 15/92 for recovering the backwages as directed by the Labour Court. She had reported for duties on 27-1-1992 but she was not reinstated in service, there, she initiate...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ramzan Khan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ951
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award passed by 7th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal, in Claim Case No. 17 of 1999, dated 18.4.2000.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that on 20.6.1998, Dawood (30) was travelling by bus No. MP 04-7330, owned by Lakhansingh and driven by Lal Miyan. When the bus reached near Holy Family School, Shanti Nagar, Bhopal, Ashok Leyland dumper No. MP 04-F 8606, owned by Ramgopal and driven by Dashrath at an excessive speed and negligently, dashed against the bus resulting in the accident. As a result, Dawood died on account of the injuries received by him in this accident. Claimants, father and mother of the deceased, preferred claim petition alleging that on account of rash and negligent driving of the dumper by the driver thereof, the accident took place in which Dawood died, who was working as a mechanic/ repairer of dynamos and batteries and was earning Rs. 250 per day. Consequently, compensation of Rs. 15,55,000 is...
Kirt Ram Singh Vs. Sewa Ram and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: AIR2002MP42; 2001(3)MPHT315
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J. 1. Heard. 2. This is an application presented on 15-3-2001 praying for recalling of the order dated 21-1-2000 whereunder the allegations regarding corrupt practices against respondent No. 1 were struck off. It may be noticed that vide the order dated 21-1-2000 the allegations of corrupt practices as contained inParagraph 1-B (a) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) and grounds B (i), (ii) and (iii) had been directed to be struck off from the election petition with a further direction that Annexures R-1 to R-8 shall not be taken into consideration and utilised against the respondent No. 1. Under the same order the prayer made in the application, LA. No. 7661/99, for taking on record the affidavit and the copy of the election petition which had been submitted all over again alongwith a new affidavit was rejected. 3. This Court in its aforesaid decision placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Smt. Shipra v. Shantilal Khoiwal, reported in AIR 1996 S...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Mahila Anita and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ397; 2001(3)MPHT443; 2001(3)MPLJ147
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J. 1. As against the claim of compensation to the tune of Rs. 19,72,200/-on account of the death of the husband of the present respondent No. 1 and father of the remaining respondents who was sole bread winner of the family in the proceedings initiated under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal gave an award determining the amount of compensation only to the extent of Rs. 3,75,000/-. 2. Feeling aggrieved, the present appellant, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation has come up in appeal against the aforesaid award praying for the setting aside of the same. The claimants have on the other hand come up with a cross- objection seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation as originally claimed but with an interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the record. 4. In the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tri...
Shivnarayan and Others Vs. Smt. Shyambai and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)MPHT147; 2002(1)MPLJ395
ORDERS.C. Pandey, J. 1. Heard on admission. 2. By the impugned order dated 26-2-2001 passed in C.S. No. 143-A/95 the learned Trial Judge has held that the earlier Civil Suit No. 88-A/87 does not operate as res-judicata within the meaning of Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Accordingly the Issue No. 8 was decided as a preliminary issue. The facts of this case disclose that the earlier suit filed by Harnarayan wasdismissed as withdrawn as per Annexure A-7 order dated 22-8-87. In this case Harnarayan had filed a suit against Ranchhor, Shivnarayan, Sardar @ Gokul as well as against the State of M.P. for declaration and permanent injunction. In other words, the plaintiff in that suit, Har Narayan, had abandoned his suit without any condition. Such a suit is covered by Order XXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In such cases Order XXIII Rule 1 (4) applies which reads as under :-- '(4) Where the plaintiff- (a) abandons any suit or part of claim under sub-rule (1), or (b) wi...
Gaurav Agro Plast Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: [2006]143STC422(MP)
ORDER1. This order shall also govern disposal of L.P.A. No. 221 of 2001 as both have been preferred against the common order passed by learned single Judge in M.P. No. 1175 of 1994 preferred at the instance of the present appellant.2. The question that was raised before the learned single Judge in substance was, whether PVC pipe fittings can be treated as a spare parts or accessories of pumping set so as to fall within entry 12 of Part IV of the Second Schedule to the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The learned single Judge has held that PVC pipe fittings cannot be said to be a spare part.3. The grievance of the appellant is that other question whether PVC pipe fitting would be an accessory of the pumping set has not at all been considered even though the same was raised before the learned single Judge.4. From the perusal of the impugned order passed by learned single Judge, we do not know if the said point was at all raised before him. There is no affidavit also filed either by the ...
Shantilal Vs. Azad Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: III(2002)ACC628
A.M. Sapre, J.1. Claimant is in appeal against the rejection of his claim petition filed for claiming compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act arising out of an accident. The learned Member of M.A.C.T. rejected the claim petition on the ground of limitation, as in his opinion, the same having been filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation, it is liable to be dismissed. It was accordingly dismissed. The cause pleaded by the claimant did not appeal to learned Member.2. Heard Mr. S.S. Kemkar, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.V. Dandwate, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3.3. Despite vehement opposition from the respondent to oppose this appeal and contending that appeal be not allowed and delay be not condoned, we are of the view that the appeal deserves to be allowed thereby setting aside of the impugned order dismissing the claim petition, as barred by limitation.4. True it is, that when the accident occurred in this case on 20.5.1990, the Act did provide for limita...
Sun Beverages (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Vivek and Company and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)MPHT121; 2002(1)MPLJ446
ORDERR.B. Dixit, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 9-3-2000 of Fourth Additional Judge to District Judge, Bhind in Civil Suit No. 4/98 where under a preliminaryobjection of the petitioners under Section 20 read with Order 7 Rule 11, CPC regarding jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the suit was overruled, the defendant-petitioners have come up in revision seeking redress praying for rejection of the plaint on the ground of jurisdiction.2. The suit of plaintiff-respondent No. 1 is for recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,86,308/- on the ground that Rajendra Singh, husband of defendant No. 1, and father of rest of the defendants, on 9-1-1995 had agreed at Bhind to supply cold drinks on the condition that the spoiled material along with Wardana will be taken back. The payment was made through bank drafts payable at Agra where the cold drink factory of the defendants is situated. During this business transaction, 1302 bags of cold drinks were found spoiled which was returned along wit...
Sukuwa Dohar Vs. Ashok Kumar Niyogi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT278
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. By this judgment, we propose to decide both the appeals mentioned above since they arise out of the same award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Satna, in Claim Case No. 16/96, dated March 15, 1997.2. Sokhilal (24), son of Sukuwa, was employed with Ashok Kumar as a labourer. It is further stated that he was employed with tractor No. CPA 6293. Accident took place on 26-3-1987 in which Sokhilal died when he came underneath the wheels of the tractor. The allegation is that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the tractor, otherwise it would not have happened. The matter was reported to the police which registered Cr. Case under Section 304A of the IPC. At the time of accident, deceased was the only son of the claimant. Wife of the deceased had left him and settled with some other person, leaving the claimant alone at home as a dependent on the deceased. The deceased was earning Rs. 15.00 per day. Total compensation of Rs. 1,60,000.0...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »