Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
Mangalia Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)MPHT260; 2002(4)MPLJ166
N.G. Karambelkar, J. 1. This order shall dispose the aforesaid two appeals, which arise out of Sessions Trial No. 225 of 1990. Learned Sessions Judge, Guna vide judgmentdated 6-12-1991 convicted appellant under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life. However, learned Trial Court has acquitted the accused of the charge under Section 376, Indian Penal Code. Appellant-Mangalia has in his appeal challenged his conviction under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, whereas the State on its part in appeal has challenged accused Mangalia's acquittal for charge under Section 376, Indian Penal Code.2. The accused/appellant-Mangalia was tried on two charges-- firstly, for offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, for having committed murder of Prabhulal son of Tulsiram, resident of Semra Ka Har, in the intervening night of 1st and 2nd July, 1990 in the house of the deceased; and secondly, at about same time, date and place he had committed sexual interc...
Mahesh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)MPHT359; 2003(1)MPLJ105
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This revision has been filed by the applicant against the order of framing of charge dated 4-1-2002 passed by VIII Addl. Sessions Judge, Indore in Sessions Trial No. 768/2000 against the applicant for the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The police of Police Station, Bhawarkua, Indore has filed a charge-sheet for the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code vide Crime No. 418/2000 against the applicant Mahesh alleging that in the night intervening between 10th and llth of April, 2000, between 2.00 and 6.00 AM, the deceased Shersingh had committed suicide inside his Hotel (Dhaba) by hanging leaving a death-note about his death. According to the said death-note as well as the statement of Mohammad Haroon Mohd. Iqbal, the applicant had taken money from the deceased Shersingh for getting him a plot at 311 I.P. Nagar, Indore Development Authority. It is further alleged that the deceased was harassed by the appellant and ultimately on 9-4...
M.P. Human Rights Commission Through Registrar (Law) Vs. State of M.P. ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2002
Reported in: AIR2002MP239; 2002(3)MPHT502
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, M.P. Human Rights Commission has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 13-4-2000, contained in Annexure P-10 and further to command the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to implement the recommendation of the petitioner-Commission.2. The facts as have been uncurtained are that the M.P. Human Rights Commission (for brevity 'the Commission') is a statutory autonomous and independent body constituted under Section 21 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') with a retired Chief Justice of a High Court Judge and District Judge as its members. The Commission has been conferred with the responsibility of promoting and protecting human rights. According to the writ petitioner Smt. Roli Shukla and Smt. Anjana Agrawal Assistant Professors of Government Motilal Vigyan Mahavidyalaya...
Ramavtar S/O Kedarnath Gupta Vs. Ramgopal, Since Deceased Through L.Rs ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2002
Reported in: AIR2003MP29; 2003(2)ARBLR87(MP); 2002(5)MPHT133
P.C. Agarwal, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff whose suit for declaration of title and possession after removal of construction has been dismissed by both the Courts below.2. Appellant had claimed that he had purchased his house with an yard in village Uchehara by registered sale-deed dated 7-7-76 from one Rammilan son of Ayodhya Prasad Gupta and had obtained possession thereof. It was claimed that towards north of this house a mud wall 22' long and 11' in width existed which was in his possession since purchase. It was claimed that the respondent has his house towards north of such house of appellant and on 25-8-85 the respondent demolished this mud wall and constructed a new wall which is 22' in length and 11' in width of 8' 6' height. It was claimed that the respondent further encroached on 7' x 2' x 6' land by constructing a wall. All per plaint, the respondent has encroached on 12-1/3 sq. ft. 17-1/2 sq. ft. of land. Despite report to the police on 25-8-85 and interfer...
Kailash Narayan Rai and ors., Etc. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2002
Reported in: AIR2003MP74; 2003(1)MPLJ482
ORDER1. The factual matrix and the grounds of law raised being common in this batch of writ petitions, it was heard analogously and is disposed of by this singular order. For the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts in W. P. 4739/2000 are adumbrated herein.2. The facts as have been uncurtained are that the petitioners are holders of stage carriage permit and plying their vehicles in various routes. Section 3. M. P. Motoryan Karadhan Adhiniyam. 1991 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Adhiniyam') provides that there shall be levy of tax on every motor vehicle used or kept for use in the State as per the rate specified in the Schedule. Section 5 of the said Adhiniyam stipulates the tax is required to be paid in advance by the owner of the motor vehicles as prescribed under the said provisions. Section 5 provides for filing of declaration and determination of tax payable. In the first schedule of the Adhiniyam tax is provided for vehicles permitted to carry more than six passengers. Th...
Malkhansingh S/O Ganpat Singh and Etc. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1790; 2002(5)MPHT14; 2002(4)MPLJ466
N.G. Karambelkar, J.1. This common judgment shall dispose of the aforesaid two appeals as they arise out of judgment dated 18-1-1997 in. Sessions Trial No. 76/1992 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Vidisha, convicting the appellants under Section 376(2)(G) Indian Penal Code and under Section 506, Part II Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 376(2)(G) Indian Penal Code, and sentencing them to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 506 (Part-II) Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. Appellants were tried for offences under Section 376(2)(G) of Indian Penal Code and Section 506 (Part-II) of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. However, the appellants were acquitted of the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes...
Mst. Ramsobai and ors. Vs. Sunil and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2002
Reported in: III(2002)ACC237
S.S. Jha, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellants for enhancement of quantum of compensation. Claims Tribunal on appreciation of evidence has found contributory negligence and reduced the compensation by 50%. Claims Tribunal has recorded a finding that the dependency was Rs. 500/- per month and has applied the multiplier of 12 and determined the compensation at Rs. 72,000/-. On account of contributory negligence compensation is reduced to Rs. 36,000/-. The mental agony is determined at Rs. 5,000/- to claimant No. 1 and Rs. 2,000/-each to other claimants which comes to Rs. 11,000/- and by adding this Rs. 11,000/- to Rs. 72,000/- the amount comes to Rs. 83,000/- and similarly for other damages loss of consortium of Rs. 5,000/- to the claimant No. 1 and claimant Nos. 3,5 and 6 have been awarded Rs. 2,000/- each.2. The accident took place on 14.10.1987. The claim petition was filed under Section 110 of Motor Vehicles Act. Counsel for appellant submitted that the reason in awarding comp...
Smt. Dhaniya Bai Vs. Jiwan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)MPHT483; 2002(3)MPLJ174
P.C. Agrawal, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the appellant against the reversing judgment of the learned First Appellate Court.2. Appellant is the real elder sister of the respondent. Their houses are contiguous. House of respondent was constructed on nazul land let out to him in May, 1967 vide lease deed Ex. P-5. House of appellant is situate on nazul land allotted to him vide Ex. D-l, dated 19-6-84.3. The respondent has filed a civil suit for removal of support of thatching and the thatching itself and for demolition of her walls contiguous to the house of respondent. As per plaint, the respondent is the owner of western wall of his house AB. The appellant has not constructed any wall of her own contiguous to it and has kept the support of her thatching on such wall and has damaged the support of thatching of the respondent. It is also claimed that the appellant has joined her walls at places AB in the wall of the respondent. As per plaint these acts of the appellant have been unau...
Raj Kumar Tamrakar Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)MPHT485; 2002(3)MPLJ481
ORDERAs per K.K. Lahoti, J.1. Petitioner by these two petitions, has invoked the jurisdiction of thisCourt to decide the question whether Tamrakar sub-tribe is included in the list of Scheduled Tribes issued by the President of India in Entry 20 of the list and for this purpose to make a roving and deep examination of the material and to declare that Tamrakar should be treated as Chhatri. 2. Writ Petition No. 2656/1995 filed by petitioner Raj Kumar Tamrakar challenging the order of Madhya Pradesh State Public Service Commission, Indore, in which petitioner has been debarred from appearing in the future examination because of his serious misconduct of filing forged certificate of Scheduled Tribes. In this case, the petitioner has prayed that Tamrakar be declared as Chhatri Scheduled Tribe as notified by 1950 Order and he may be permitted to enjoy all the privileges and concessions available to member of Scheduled Tribe. 3. Writ Petition No. 2184/1998 has been filed by the same petitione...
National Security Force Vs. Regional P.F. Commissioner and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR693]; (2003)IILLJ114MP
Arun Mishra, J.1. The petitioner seeks relief in the instant writ petition to quash the order dated March 22, 2000 Annexure-P/12 and letter dated April 10, 2000 Annexure-P/13.2. As per order Annexure-P/12 the Regional Commissioner has passed an order on the basis of submission of establishment representative that all the employees listed in the letter dated October 4, 1997 are ex-servicemen, are in receipt of pension benefits under the Government Rules, such establishments have been exempted from operation of Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952; in the light of the notification dated February 8, 1995, an order was passed on March 22, 2000 to decode the establishment in order to exempt it from the purview of the Act with effect from March 1, 2000. Management was advised to submit the claim form for the payment from the office and implementation of the Act will be ceased from March 1, 2000.3. A letter Annexure-P/13 dated April 10, 2000 was issued by the Regio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »