Madhya Pradesh Court October 2002 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.
Ram Salone Sharma and anr. Vs. Ram Ashrya Sharma and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT542; 2003(3)MPLJ252
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is a revision by the plaintiffs against the order by which it has been held that the civil suit for declaration and injunction is not maintainable in view of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.2. The petitioner's case is that the house in dispute situated in Village Ramnagar Jtma is their joint family property and of the defendant Nos. 1 and 2. According to plaintiffs, Dhanukdhari was the owner of this house. He had four sons. Plaintiff No. 1 Ramsalone, Defendant No. 1 Ramashraya and defendant No. 2 Ramlolar are three of them. Mangaldeen was also son of Dhanukdhari. He has died and plaintiff No. 2 Bhagwandas is his son. Thus, according to the plaintiffs they had half share in the house which has been acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer for Bansagar Project. The amount of compensation has been deposited. Half of the amount of compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer has been paid to the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 and the remaining ha...
Smt. Shahista Qureshi Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT184; 2003(3)MPLJ97
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a revision by the plaintiff against the order by which she has been directed to pay advalorem Court Fee on Rs. 2,61,922/-.2. The plaintiff is widow of Sheikh Wahab and defendant No. 4 Sheikh Mehboob is his father. Sheikh Wahab was a school teacher in a Government School in Paraswara Block. He died on 20-5-1999. A sum of Rs. 2,61,922/- is payable by the Government as death-cum-retirement dues. The plaintiff claims that he had nominated her during his life time to receive these dues in the event of his death; he had done so as per Government Rules and therefore she alone is entitled to the said amount. The defendant No. 4 submitted an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of the succession certificate. The plaintiff also submitted an application for the same purpose. An order was passed on 7-8-2000 for grant of succession certificate in respect of l/4th amount in favour of the plaintiff and for 3/4th amount in favour of the def...
Kaluram Vs. Sunderlal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)MPHT88
ORDERRajeev Gupta, J.1. This is complainant's revision petition against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 6-8-96 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Multai, District Betul in S.T. No. 149/95, whereby accused persons Sunderlal, Anil, Vajir and Bharat were acquitted of the charges under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34, IPC.2. The accused persons were alleged to have committed murder of one Fakir, son of informant Pannalal, and attempted at the life of Kaluram, son of Tutkiya Pawar, in the evening of 14-5-95.3. At the trial, the accused persons abjured their guilt and pleaded false implication to the charges framed by the Trial Court for the allegedcommission of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34, IPC.4. The above charges against the accused persons were sought to be proved on the evidence of as many as 17 witnesses examined by the prosecution at the trial. The accused persons also examined as many as 6 witnesses in their defence.5. T...
Mahavir Prasad Vs. Vasudeva Prashad and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC113
S. Samvatsar, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated 29.1.1994, passed by Second Additional District Judge, Morena Camp Sabalgarh in Civil Suit No. 12B/89, whereby the Court below has passed a decree for payment of Rs. 19,884/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum and the costs. 2. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 filed a suit for recoveryof an amount of Rs. 26,999.85 p. alleging that the plaintiff had supplied goods (grains) amounting to Rs. 19,884.50 p. on credit on 9.3.1985 vide bill (Ex. P/1). Ex. P/2 is the entry in the stock register. Ex. P/3 is a copy of the cash-book and Ex.P/4 is a copy of the account. According to the plaintiff, this amount was not paid by the defendant, hence, he filed the present suit after serving a notice (Ex. P/5). Ex. P/7 is a copy of the acknowledgement. 3. The defendant in his written statement denied the said transaction in toto. 4. The Trial Court relying on the copies ...
Engineering Systems Limited Vs. M.P. Electricity Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ARBLR537(MP); 2003(1)MPHT202; 2003(2)MPLJ338
ORDERS.P. Khare1. This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act') for appointment of arbitrator.2. It is not in dispute that the applicant was awarded contract by the non-applicant for 'augmentation of coal handling plant' at Satpura, Thermal Power Station, Sarni by order dated 31-3-1984. The civil work was excluded from this contract. The applicant submitted the running bills. The non-applicant paid an amount of Rs. 2,82,644/- to the applicant on 17-8-1998. There is an arbitration clause in the contract. According to the arbitration agreement any dispute between the parties 'in relation to or in connection with the contract' is to be referred to the two arbitrators, one to be nominated by the applicant and the other by the non-applicant. In case of disagreement between the arbitrators they would appoint an umpire. The applicant by letter dated 12-2-1999 called upon the non-applicant to agree for appo...
The Industrial Gases Limited Vs. Kusum Ingots and Alloys Limited
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ARBLR283(MP); 2003(1)MPHT558
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. This appeal has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act of 1996') being aggrieved by the order dated 26-7-1997 passed by XII Additional District Judge, Indore in M.J.C. No. 13/97, dismissing the application filed by the appellant under Section 9 of the Act of 1996 for interim relief on the ground that the Courthas no jurisdiction to decide the application since the amount of dispute between the parties is more than 25 lacs.2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant-Company entered into an agreement dated 5-6-1995 with the respondent for sale and supply of industrial gases. On 16-1-1997, a notice for termination of the contract was given by the appellant due to breach of contract and on 4-2-1997, the respondent gave a reply of the notice proposing to appoint an arbitrator as per the arbitration Clause 15 of the agreement. But due to the dispute between the parties, the arbitrator could no...
Prahlad and ors. Vs. Smt. Kalabatibai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT552
K.K. Lahoti, J.1. Defendants aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below by which suit filed by Kalabatibai wife of Babulal Arora was decreed for bona fide necessity to start hotel business of her major son Chhaganlal under Section 12 (1) (f) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, have filed present appeal. 2. This appeal was admitted on 10-5-2002 on following substantial question of law :-- 'Whether the suit filed by respondent/widow was maintainable before the Civil Court in view of Section 11-A of Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 ?' 3. To appreciate the contention advanced on behalf of appellants, it is necessary to state facts in brief. Kalabatibai filed present suit on 20th April, 1992 for eviction on the ground of bona fide necessity for starting hotel business of her major son Chhaganlal and for recovery of arrears of rent. Appellants contested the suit inter alia, though have not taken specific ground in the Trial Court, that the suit was...
Mohanlal S/O Badrilal Luhar Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1688; 2003(86)ECC431; 2003(1)MPLJ227
S.L. Kochar, J.1. This Criminal Appeal also governs the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 1260/97 filed by the appellant through jail.The aforesaid Criminal Appeals have been preferred by the appellant against judgment dated 13.10.1997, delivered by ASJ Garoth Camp at Bhanpura District Mandsaur in Special Case No. 135/96, thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act') and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs. 1,00,000, in default of payment of fine, further imprisonment for 2 years.2. The prosecution case, before the trial Court, in nutshell, was that on 26th July, 1996 at about 10.05 a.m. ASI Ramyash Tiwari (PW 10) of GRP Police Station Shyamgarh, received an information through the informant that one person wearing Payjama and Shirt, carrying opium with him and is waiting for Dehradun Express on platform No. 1 for going to Baroda. Thi...
isaac Jaise and anr. Vs. Jasmit Singh Saluja and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1980
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J. 1. This Criminal Revision, has been filed by the applicant/accused for quashing proceedings pending before learned Judicial in Criminal Case No. 279/02 as well as impugned order dated 2-7-2002 thereby, dismissing the application filed under Sections 203, 204 Cr PC, by the applicants for their discharge.2. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that Non-applicant No. 1 has filed criminal complaint against applicants under Sections 406, 420 IPC alleging that on 30th Nov. 2001, at about 3.15 p.m. applicants came to his house and forcibly took Wagon R. VX/car bearing registration No. MP 09/T-0532. The said vehicle was taken by the applicants forcibly without his permission. It is also alleged that on some blank papers, by adopting coercive method, his signatures were obtained. The vehicle was purchased by the non-applicant No. 1 from the applicants on hire purchase agreement and it was financed by the applicants on 14th August, 2000. The applicants ...
Remgul Alias Remulal and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(89)ECC41; 2003(1)MPLJ445
S.L. Kochar, J. 1. This appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment dated 8.11.1997 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaora in Sessions Trial No. 238/95, thereby convicting the appellants for the offence under Section 8/21 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentencing them each to suffer R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 and in default of payment of fine to suffer further R.I. for three years.2. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution before the trial Court was that on 31.10.1995 at 10.05 a.m., Himmatsingh Rana (PW-7) Town Inspector, Jaora received information that the appellant No. 1 Remugal alias Remulal R/o Bargundapura, Jaora was having in his possession some smack illegally in his house and after preparing small packets, was selling them. He prepared the Panchanama of the information (Ex.P/3) and after obtaining search warrant from t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »