Madhya Pradesh Court November 2002 Judgments
Ranjan Sharma Vs. Rambabu Vaishya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: AIR2003MP186; 2003(1)MPLJ319
S. SAMVATSAR, J. 1. The order in this revision shall also govern the disposal of Civil Revision No. 670 of 2000 (Raju Sharma v. Rambabu Vaishya) and Civil Revision No. 671 of 2000 (Smt. Laxmidevi Sharma v. Rambabu Vaishya), as all these three revisions arise out of a common order dated 31-3-2000 passed by Eighth Civil Judge Class-I. Gwalior in Case No. 4A/96.2. All these revisions are filed by the defendant, against whom a decree for ejectment was passed and was maintained up to the Supreme Court. The petitioners were tenant of the respondent landlord paying rent at the rate of Rs. 270/- per month. The suit was decreed by the trial Court on 15-7-96. The first appeal was dismissed on 15-12-1998. Second Appeal was also dismissed by this court on 7-7-1999 and the Apex Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition on 6-3-2000. While passing the original decree the Court directed the Executing Court to assess the amount of mesne profits. Accordingly, the mesne profits were decided by the Execu...
Tag this Judgment!Bhogi Ram and ors. Vs. Shaitaan Singh Sikarwaar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: III(2003)ACC632
S. Samvatsar, J.1. This appeal is filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, challenging an award dated 24th January, 1995 passed by Additional Member Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Morena in Case No. 258/94 whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to claimant Nos. 1 and 2 for the death of their son Chowkhariya.2. Facts of the case are that one Chowkhariya who was aged 20 years and was the son of appellant Nos. 1 and 2 and brother of appellant Nos. 3 to 6 died in a motor accident held on 19th January, 1991. Appellant Nos. 3 to 6 being the brothers of the deceased were not awarded any compensation as they are not Class I heirs. Appellant No. 2 who is the mother of the deceased is the only Class I heir and, therefore, Class II heirs are not entitled for any compensation. Claims Tribunal, therefore, has rightly refused to pass any award in their favour. As regards mother of the deceased is concerned, she is the only person entitled...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Prasad Agrawal and anr. Vs. Bhagwandas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT36; 2003(4)MPLJ88
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a revision by th6 defendants against order dated 3-2-2001 of the First Civil Judge Class-I, Umaria in Civil Suit No. 97-A of 2000 by which it has been held that the valuation of the suit for purposes of the Court-fee and pecuniary jurisdiction is proper.2. The plaintiffs case is that defendant No. 1 Ram Prasad Agrawal purchased 16 ft. x 40 ft. of land from him for Rs. 25,000/-. He took him for execution and registration of the sale-deed and then played fraud upon him. According to the plaintiff he has been defrauded on two counts. Firstly, the land which has been included in the registered sale-deed dated 28-9-1999 exceeds the area which was agreed to be sold and secondly, the amount of consideration shown in the sale-deed is Rs. 50,000/- whereas he has been paid an amount of Rs. 25,000/- only. He claims that he is in possession of the land in dispute. He has claimed the relief of declaration that the sale-deed is the product of fraud and misrepresentation...
Tag this Judgment!Roopchand Vs. Babulal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)MPHT162; 2003(2)MPLJ267
K.K. Lahoti, J. 1. Appellant filed a suit challenging the finding of Registrar, Public Trusts, Sagar under Section 8 of M.P. Public Trusts Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' for short). The aforesaid suit was dismissed by the Trial Court on merit. The Trial Court also considered that the suit was filed without impleading State of M.P. and serving notice under Section 80 of CPC.2. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of Trial Court, plaintiff filed an appeal. Before the Appellate Court, appellant filed two applications, one under Order 1 Rule 10, CPC, to implead State of M.P. and Registrar, Public Trusts, Sagar as defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and another application under Order 41 Rule 27, CPC, by which permission was sought of to file notice issued to the State and Registrar, Public Trusts, Sagar under Section 80, CPC, alongwith postal and acknowledgment receipts. The aforesaid applications were contested by defendant/respondent No. 1. These applications were considered by the impug...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Lal Bathri Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-2002
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1002; 2003(2)MPHT527; 2003(3)MPLJ326
ORDERUma Nath Singh, J.1. This criminal revision impugns the order dated 8-2-2002 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Seoni in Criminal Trial No. 432/99, framing charges under Sections 2 and 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act').2. It is said that the complainant being a Sarpanch and the accused/applicant being the Principal of a Government High School were on inimical terms over hoisting of the national flag on 26-1-1999. It is also said that the issue was resolved and it was decided that the complainant would hoist the flag on the Republic Day in the premises of the school. It is also said that inadvertently the flag was tied in reverse order by putting saffron colour down by a lower staff of the school and the moment it came to the notice of the accused the flag was put in order and the matter ended. However, the complainant lodged a report with police which was registered as Rojnamcha Sanha No. 600 dated 26-1-99 at Police S...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Vs. Gajjo @ Gajju and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC335
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. This is claimant is appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for enhancement of compensation, against the award dated 8.9.1999, passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kukshi, District Dhar, in Claim Case No. 65/1998.2. The claimant is a boy of 18 years. The accident took place on 7.5.1998 at village Chikhalda. The claimant was going for taking bath in Narmada river on bicycle. He was hit by a truck bearing registration No. MP-09/K-3509. The said truck was being driven by respondent No. 1 Gajju. It was owned by respondent No. 2 Kishana Gopal and was insured with the respondent No. 3. In the accident, the young boy received fracture in his right femur bone. The matter was reported to the police station Kukshi. The claimant was taken to the Civil Hospital Barwani, where he was treated by P.W. 1 Dr. V.L. Khangar and remained admitted from 7.5.1998 to 13.6.1998.3. The claimant filed a claim petition for claiming a compensation of Rs. 2,3...
Tag this Judgment!Sobhraj Sindhi and anr. Vs. Mohd. Jahoor and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT33
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a revision by the defendants against the order by which their appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (d), CPC has been dismissed. In this appeal they had challenged the order by which their application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC for setting aside the exparte decree in Civil Suit No. 140-A of 1984 was rejected.2. The suit was decreed exparte on 17-1-1991. The case of the defendants is that this case was being looked after by the defendant No. 2 Bhagchand who became seriously ill and therefore, he could not attend the hearings of the case from 13-12-89 to 17-1-1991. On the other hand, it has been stated by the plaintiffs that the defendants have been negligent and therefore their absence cannot be condoned and exparte decree cannot be set aside. The Trial Court and Appellate Court have held that there was not sufficient cause for the defendants to remain absent and therefore, exparte decree cannot be set aside.3. After hearing the arguments of both the sides and after...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Rashid Khan Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Road Trans. Corporation ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2002
Reported in: 2004ACJ1135
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 9.7.1993, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhind, in Claim Case No. 24 of 1988.2. The accident took place on 13.6.1988 when the claimant boarded bus No. CIH 7857, but fell off since the driver started the bus without ensuring that the claimant had got into the same safely. As a result of this accident, the claimant suffered compound fracture in the left ankle joint and right pubic bone. He was treated at District Hospital, Bhind, then shifted to J.A. Hospital, Gwalior, where he remained for sufficient long time. He was operated, rod inserted in the left leg, skin grafted in the left leg. The claimant is a air-conditioner mechanic in MES, Gwalior. He claimed compensation of Rs. 4,13,600/-.3. There is no dispute with respect to taking place of accident as a result of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus. There is also no dispute with respect to injuries suffered by the claimant in this acci...
Tag this Judgment!Swan Finance Limited Vs. Pratibha Cold Storage (P) Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CompLJ20(MP); [2004]50SCL289(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. None appeared for petitioner as also for respondents. I have perused the record of the case. In my opinion, this is not a fit case for admission of company petition filed under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act.2. It is the case of the petitioner that they had given a loan in the form of deposit to the respondent company amounting to Rs. 2,50,000. It is complained that respondent failed to repay, and when actually repaid, by cheques to the petitioner, the cheques got bounced. It is on this basis, the petitioner says that respondent company is deemed unable to pay the debts within the meaning of Section 433(e), ibid., and as a consequence liable to be wound up.3. It is not in dispute as is clear from the previous order sheet of the court that most of the amount the respondent has repaid on different dates. The respondents' representatives appeared in this court and gave undertaking. If at all, what remains or must have remained for its repayment is only a small ...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kishanlal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC565
Deepak Verma, J.1. Mr. S.V. Dandvate, learned Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company; Mr. M. Jain, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. None appears for other respondents.2. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the Insurance Company is only against the extent of amount of compensation. The Tribunal below, for the death of a child aged 7 years, awarded a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- to the parents of the deceased i.e. respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The parents are aged 25-30 years.3. The Tribunal below has taken recourse to the Schedule-II of the M.V. Act, which provides for a notional income in case the deceased was not an earning member. The notional income shown is Rs. 15,000/- per annum. It also provides for a multiplier of 15 to be applied in such a case. However, the Tribunal below has not made any allowance for the amount where the parents were required to spend on the deceased himself. Normal practice in this regard has been to reduce the amount of income b...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »