Madhya Pradesh Court September 2002 Judgments
Hanuman Datt and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: AIR2003MP190; 2002(4)MPHT343; 2002(4)MPLJ354
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a revision by the plaintiffs under Section 115, CPC against the order by which their appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (r), CPC challenging the order of the rejection of their application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC filed in the suit, has been dismissed.2. A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the respondent No. 3 that the present revision is not maintainable in view of the proviso to Section 115(1), CPC. Reliance is placed by him on the decision of this Court in Sawal Singh v. Smt. Ramsakhi, 2002(4) M.P.H.T. 200 = 2002 (II) MPJR 169. This objection has been raised in several other revision petitions pending before this Court. Therefore, arguments were heard at length. Sarvashri Ravish Agrawal, Sr. Advocate, R.P. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate, R.P. Jain, R.S. Tiwari, P.D. Tiwari, Alok Aradhe and Ajay Mishra, Advocates have also addressed this Court on this point.3. The proviso to Section 115(1), CPC reads as under:--'Provid...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshchandra Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT56
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J. 1. The petitioner has lodged his grievance against the order dated 4-7-98 passed by the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Indore Bench (Division Bench) in O.A. No. 499/96 whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed his petition and maintaining the order of removal of the petitioner from service dated 30-4-94 passed by the then Superintendent of Police, Dhar and affirmed in appeal by order in appeal dated 27-7-94 as well as in the representation by order dated 17-2-95 respectively.2. The petitioner assailed the order of removal from service before the learned Tribunal on three grounds :--(i) He was appointed by way of promotion as Head Constable by the Dy. Inspector General of Police vide order dated 23-9-98 whereas he was removed by the Superintendent of Police. Therefore, the order of removal was without jurisdiction. (ii) Regarding non-compliance of Rule 18 of the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as th...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT392
S.L. Kochar, J. 1. This judgment also governs the disposal of Criminal Revision No. 549/2002. 2. Both the aforesaid criminal revisions have been filed by the applicants against the judgment dated 25th July, 2002 passed by II ASJ, Ujjain, in Criminal Appeal Nos. 105/2002 and 106/2002 arising out of judgment dated 3-7-2002 passed in Criminal Case No. 1959/2002 by learned ACJM, Ujjain, thereby convicting the applicants for the offence under Section 34 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act (for short 'the Act') and sentencing each of them to undergo RI for one year with fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer further simple imprisonment for 3 months each. 3. The prosecution case, in nutshell was that on 31st August, 2001, in the night, Excise Officers of the Excise Department were on patrolling duty and checking the motor vehicles. At the relevant time, the applicants were sitting in a tempo - trex - bearing Registration No. MP/14-H-1391, On search of the said tempo -...
Tag this Judgment!Gwalior Dugdha Sangh Sahkari Maryadit and anr. Vs. Narendra Pal Singh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)MPHT562; 2002(2)MPLJ463
Chandresh Bhushan, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of L.P.A. No. 90/2002, (Gwalior Dugdha Sangh Sahkari Maryadit and Anr. v. Dinesh Kumar Sharma and Ors.).2. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal of his writ petition, to quash the order dated 28-8-2000 of M.P.S. Co-operative Tribunal confirming the finding of the First Appellate Court regarding limitation in respect to the application of respondent No. 1, and it's order of remand of the case for further trial to the Dy. Registrar, the petitioner society has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of Nagpur.3. Facts in brief are that the respondent No. 1, who was an employee of the petitioner co-operative society had filed a writ in the High Court, challenging his transfer to Ambikapur, which was allowed and leave to appeal against that order, was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Subsequently, after rejection of his claim under Industrial Disputes Act, by the Labour Court, he had filed an applic...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Vs. Smt. Sampatbai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC364
ORDER1. This order shall govern the disposal of aforesaid appeals filed on behalf of the Insurance Company and the claimant Nasrat Khan against the common award dated 19.8.2000 passed by the 1st Addl. Member, Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur whereby the application filed under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act (for short the Act) on behalf of the claimants for award of compensation is partly allowed.2. The facts of the case in brief are that--on 17.9.1996 the appellant claimants Nasrat Khan and one Kuwarlal travelling in an autorickshaw met with an accident by bus No. MP-13-T-7799 and sustained serious injuries. In the said accident Kuwarlal died as a result of the injuries caused to him. Injured appellant Nasrat Khan of M.A. 93/2001 and the LRs. of deceased Kuwarlal filed two separate petitions before the Tribunal for award of compensation under the provisions of the Act. Learned Tribunal allowed both the petitions and awarded compensation of Rs. 2,42,400/- in favour of the LRs o...
Tag this Judgment!Jhalle Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT260
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Accused/appellant-Jhalle (hereinafter referred as 'the accused') has filed this appeal against the judgment and sentence dated 6-3-1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panna in Sessions Trial No. 71/88 convicting him of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201, IPC, awarding sentence of rigorous imprisonment of life and five years respectively with a further stipulation that both the sentences would run concurrently. By the same judgment, co-accused Lakkhu @ Lakhan Lal has been acquitted.2. In brief, the case of prosecution is that deceased Shivshanker Sharma (hereinafter referred as 'deceased') was serving on the post of 'Forest Guard'. On 7-5-1988, deceased Shivshanker went on his bicycle to his place of duty. He was in uniform and was also wearing a wrist-watch. At his duty place, he took attendance of labourers working under him. Ram Das (P.W. 2), and Sharan Singh (P.W. 4), are the labourers of Forest Department and were serving und...
Tag this Judgment!Mahesh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT266
A.K. Shrivastava, J.:1. The accused/appellant was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 120B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC). The other co-accused persons namely, Ghisla @ Ghasiram, Karodhi and Gorelal were charged for the offence punishable under Section 120B, IPC, but they were acquitted by the impugned judgment. The appellant too was acquitted, for the offence punishable under Section 120B, IPC, but, was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC, and has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of life by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mudwara vide its judgment dated 21-4-1990 passed in Sessions Trial No. 185/86.2. The facts, shorn of unnecessary details, lie in a narrow compass. The case of prosecution is that, few days prior to 19-2-1986 and 20-2-1986 there was some complaint, in the village, that deceased/Ram Milan, outraged the modesty of a girl, Sita Bai, taking note of which, the inhabitants of th...
Tag this Judgment!Arjun Singhal Vs. Pushpa Karwal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2002
Reported in: AIR2003MP189; 2002(4)MPHT321; 2003(3)MPLJ80
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a reference under Section 113, CPC by the Fourth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur for the opinion of this Court on the point whether the case is triable by him or the Family Court, Jabalpur which has been established by the notification dated 4-3-2002 by the State Government in exercise of the powers under Section 3 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act').2. According to the aforesaid notification the Family Court, Jabalpur has the territorial jurisdiction within the area specified in column No. 4 of the Schedule appended thereto. That area is 'limits of the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur including Cantonment area'. Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides that every petition under this Act shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary civil jurisdiction (i) the marriage was solemnized; or (ii) the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides; or...
Tag this Judgment!Yeshwant Kumar Mehta Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT377
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This revision is filed by the applicant against the order of framing of charge under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and directing trial passed in Special Case No. 2/2002 by the learned Special Judge, Mandsaur on 12-8-2002 and 27-6-2002 respectively.2. Brief facts required to be mentioned for disposal of this revision are that the non-applicant/State filed a charge-sheet against the applicant for commission of offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It was alleged against the applicant that he being a Junior Engineer as Public Servant in M.P. Electricity Board, Centre Afzalpur, accepted illegal gratification of Rs. 1,800/- for granting electric connection to the complainant. The applicant was tried by the First Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Mandsaur in Sessions Trial No. 1/2000.3. The learned Trial Court vide its judgment dated 10-10-2000 acquitted the applicant on the ground that al...
Tag this Judgment!Alakh Prakash and ors. Vs. Janki Prasad and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT306; 2003(3)MPLJ10
ORDERUma Nath Singh, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.2. This criminal revision impugns the order dated 10-4-2002 passed by the learned Special Judge, Chhatarpur framing charges against the applicants in a complaint case No. 31/2001 for offences under Sections 147, 323/149, 294/149, 506 -II/149 and 392/149, IPC, apart from a charge also under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.3. On a due consideration of submissions, so also from the documents filed with criminal revision, it appears that the complainant's case is primarily based on his statement and that of his wife Laxmibai. The learned Trial Judge has framed the charges on having found, prima facie, materials against the applicants. As the impugned order does not suffer from any legal infirmity leading to miscarriage of justice, I am not inclined to interfere with the same which has been passed in terms of the ratio-pertinens of the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »