Madhya Pradesh Court January 2002 Judgments
Union Bank of India Vs. Chhatarpur Siliment Sales Corporation and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2002
Reported in: AIR2002MP145; 2002(3)MPLJ521
V.K. Agarwal, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 13.8.98 in Civil Suit No. 2-B/86 by Third Additional District Judge, Chhatarpur, decreeing a sum of Rs. 27,401-60 p. with interest thereon, from the date of suit, till payment thereof @ 6% per annum. 2. The plaintiff/appellant filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 27,401-60 p. According to the plaintiff/appellant a loan of Rs. 20,000/- was obtained by defendant/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on 19.12.81 from plaintiff Bank. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were their guarantors. The parties had agreed that rate of interest payable on the above loan would be 3.5 % above the rate fixed by Reserve Bank of India and minimum 13.5% per annum with quarterly rests. Since the defendant/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 failed to repay the loan amount as per terms agreed to between the parties, hence the suit for recovery of Rs. 27,401-60 p., including interest till the date of suit. The suit was resisted by defendants/respondents. 3. The Trial ...
Tag this Judgment!State of M.P. and anr. Vs. Gyanprakash (Deceased) Through L.R. Kanhaiy ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)MPHT282
A.K. Gohil, J. 1. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:--'(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Lower Appellate Court has erred in holding that the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution of India were attracted in the instant case ? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theLower Appellate Court has erred in holding that the plaintiff respondent had attained the status of a quasi permanent or permanent employee ?' 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that respondent plaintiff was appointed as Peon in Irrigation Department on 31-7-71. He was continued in the employment till 11-4-75. In the meantime he was arrested and prosecuted in criminal offence and thereafter on 18-7-79 he was acquitted from the charges of criminal offence. But in the meantime on 11-4-75 his services were discontinued. After acquittal in criminal case he filed suit for declaration that his termination order is ...
Tag this Judgment!Jamuna Bai Vs. Bholaram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2002
Reported in: AIR2003MP40; 2002(5)MPHT499; 2002(2)MPLJ352
P.C. Agrawal, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the defendant under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (to be called as 'Code' only). 2. Bholaram (R. 1) and late Nanhu were brothers. Jamuna Bai (the appellant), is widow of late Nanhu. Bholaram (R. 1) had filed a civil suit for declaration of his title and that the appellant had no right to get partitioned khasra Nos. 7, 121, 125 and 160 area 44.25 acres land revenue Rs, 119.99 paise situate at village Jogla, Tehsil Narsurullhaganj, District Sehore (to be called as 'suit land' only). Such a civil suit No. 14-A/83 (Bholaram v. Jamuna Bai and another by the Civil Judge, Class II. Narsurgullahganj), was dismissed and both Bholaram (R.1) and Smt. Jamuna Bai (appellant) were found to be joint owners of the suit lands. However, Civil Appeal No. 14-A/ 93 (Bholaram v. Smt. Jamuna Bai and another) was allowed on 24-3-1995 by the Second Addl. District Judge, Sehore Camp Narsurullahganj and Bholaram (R.1) was declared the sole owner of the ...
Tag this Judgment!State of M.P. Vs. Jhallobai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT52
ORDERN.S. Azad, J. .1 This application under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed seeking cancellation of order of bail dated 8-12-2000 passed by J.M.F.C., Jabalpur in favour of non-applicant Nos. 2 to 5. 2. A perusal of aforesaid impugned order reveals that against non-applicant Nos. 2 to 5, Crime No. 524/2000 was registered at Police Station, Belbag, District Jabalpur, for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 294 of the IPC. These non-applicant Nos. 2 to 5 were released on bail by police on account of all the aforesaid offences being bailable. Thereafter, during the course of investigation, the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC was added to the link of aforesaid offences on account of death of Ranno, the victim and hence by cancelling the earlier bail, police of Belbag took all the non-applicant Nos, 2 to 5 in custody and produced before the J.M.F.C. for seeking judicial remand. One co-accused Raju alias Salim was already an judicial custody si...
Tag this Judgment!Jila Panchayat, Balaghat Vs. Commissioner, Jabalpur and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT45; 2002(3)MPLJ448
ORDERArun Mishra, J. 1. In these three writ petitions common question is involved; whether the selection list on the basis of selection process should have been prepared on the total marks obtained in 'concerned subject group' or on the basis of marks obtained in particular 'subject' of the group. 2. The matter of appointment of Shiksha Karmi Grade-II, is governed by the M.P. Panchayat Shiksha Karmis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997, which were notified on 1st January, 1998. The Schedule-II to the rules framed under Rule 2 (c) and Rule 5 of the rules as it stood on the date of advertisement; 27-4-1998 provided educational qualification for Gradc-II Shiksha Karmi 'a second class graduate degree in the related subject group'. Advertisement; Annexure P-2 in W.P. No. 5461/1999, the qualification which was prescribed was degree in the subject, whereas the selection list which was prepared by the District Panchayat was not on the basis of marks obtained in related subject ...
Tag this Judgment!Balram Kirar Through L.Rs. Vs. Ram Krishna and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: AIR2002MP139; 2002(2)MPHT529; 2002(3)MPLJ268
P.C. Agrawal, J. 1. This is a plaintiffs second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (to be called as 'Code' only).2. Balram Kirar (since deceased.-L.Rs. brought on record to be called as plaintiff only), on 28-8-78 filed a civil suit for declaration that document dated 9-1-67 is not a sale deed but is a mortgage deed and for possession of agricultural land Khasra No. 4 area 27.62 situate in Village Ghograpura Khakrapura, District Hoshangabad. As per plaint the plaintiff was in need of money and had approached Ram Ratan (R-2) for taking loan on which Ram Ratan insisted that the plaintiff has to mortgage his land. Ram Ratan (R-2) is a money lender who advances loan to villagers and gets executed sale deeds of their lands. On 9-1-67 the plaintiff went to the Sub-Registrar's Office, Hoshangabad and Ram Ratan (R-2) got his thumb mark on certain papers without reading over the contents thereof. It was agreed between the parties that Ram Ratan (R-2) would take the usufruct...
Tag this Judgment!Ku. Rolam Tiwari and anr. Vs. the Board of Secondary Education and anr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: AIR2002MP184; 2002(4)MPLJ67
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The seminal issue that arises for consideration in the present writ petition is whether the two petitioners who have approached this Court to get their answer scripts evaluated and results thereof declared by the Board of Secondary Education (in short 'the Board') through their natural guardians, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court are entitled to the said relief.2. The facts as have been depicted in the writ petition are that the petitioner No.1 appeared in the annual examination of class XII and the petitioner No.2 in class X as regular students in the year 2000-2001. It is pleaded that they have been good students and the standard of teaching in the respondent No.2, school, has been quite exemplary and hence, they expected good percentage of marks. Their examination centre along with other students was fixed at Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Garh, District, Rewa, and the Center superintendent was one Shri V. D, Dixit, a Lecturer fr...
Tag this Judgment!Usha Bai Vs. Yogendra Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ1509; (2002)IIILLJ87MP; 2002(3)MPLJ54
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, dated June 6, 1997whereby the claim of appellant has beendismissed.2. Shortly stated, facts of the case are that deceased Molai Sahu was employed with respondent as Driver-cum-Labourer. He was receiving Rs. 40.00 per day while driving the tractor and on other days he was getting Rs. 30.00 per day. At the time of the accident, on August 22, 1994, he was 26 years old.3. The appellant, wife of the deceased, has claimed Rs. 1,50,000.00 by way of compensation and also demanded Rs. 50,000.00 towards penalty and filed the petition for award of Rs. 2,00,000.00 and interest at the rate of 12% per annum thereon.4. The respondent contested the claim and stated that the deceased was not driver but was a lagua (agricultural labourer). He was not having driving licence. But in the absence of the respondent, deceased had taken the tractor on his own to bring stone slabs and the accident occurr...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Kumar and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ3718
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The petitioners, namely, Sushil Kumar, s/o Shri Chand Mal and Sunil Kumar, s/o Shri Pal have approached this Court for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 10-4-2001 passed by the Probation Board under Prisoners' Release on Probation Rules, 1964 (herenafter referred to as 'the Rules') refusing to release them on licence and the confirmation thereof by the State Government by order dated 25-4-2001.2. I may at the outset state that the present writ petition has been filed by giving details with regard to the concept of liberty, human rights, divinity that dwells in human heart, rights of freedom and such other rights that are put on a pedestal. There is prolific reference to the saving of Wallace Strews, Mahatma Gandhi, the father of the nation and some eminent Judges to build the foundation that the orders of rejection and confirmation thereof are sensitively suseptible and cannot stand scrutiny and deserve to be axed by this Court in exe...
Tag this Judgment!Mulayam Singh and anr. Vs. Budhuwa Chamar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT140; 2002(2)MPLJ480
K.K. Lahoti, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 5279/2000, dated 24-9-2001 allowing the petition and quashing the order dated 17-7-2000 passed in Revision No. R.N./11-1/R/513/93 Board of Revenue, Gwalior (MP) and order passed by the Commissioner, Sagar Division, Sagar in Revision No. 222/A-6/91-92, dated 30th March, 1993 confirming the order of Additional Collector, District Chhattarpur in Revision Case No. 33/A-6/89-90, dated 28-12-1991 were restored.2. The facts of the case are that the respondent Budhuwa Chamar belongs to Scheduled Caste. He was landless person. He was allotted a piece of land on 3-11-1973 by Patta (Annexure A-1) under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). The patta was granted by Tehsildar, Laundi, District Chhattarpur. It was a temporary patta. The conditions No. 7(1) and (4) of this Patta prohibit transfer of the land granted by the patta. Howe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »