Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Neetu JaIn and ors. Vs. Sitaram and Brothers and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-2002
Reported in: 2004ACJ461
S.L. Jain, J.1. Appellants-claimants had filed an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) for the award of compensation initiating the proceedings arising out of an accident involving a motor vehicle, a tanker lorry/ truck bearing its registration No. GTS 6130 wherein Manoj Kumar Jain, son of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 and husband of appellant No. 1, had met with untimely death at the age of 29 years.2. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, on consideration of the evidence and the materials brought on record by the various parties, had determined that the present appellants, i.e., the wife and parents of the deceased were entitled to an amount of Rs. 3,02,400 towards loss of dependency, Rs. 5,000 towards loss of consortium and Rs. 2,000 for the expenses of the last rites of the deceased, total of which comes to Rs. 3,09,400. Rounding up the figure, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,10,000 specifying t...
Dr. Basant Kumar Agrawal Vs. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT386
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 3-11-1998 (Annexure P-1) of the respondent No. 1 by which the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 have been promoted from the post of Up-Vaidya to Vaidya. 2. The petitioner is holding the degree of B.A.M.S. and the substantive post of Up-Vaidya in the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur. The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 were also holding the same post and they have been shown as senior to the petitioner on that post. By the impugned order they have been promoted as Vaidya. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 obtained the qualification of 'Ayurvedic Ratna' from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag before 4-11-1989. This was a recognised qualification upto that date but it was derecognised from 4-11-1989 by deleting Entry 51 from the Schedule annexed to M.P. Ayurvedic Unani Tatha Prakritik Chikitsa Vyavasayi Adhiniyam, 1970 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'). The respondent No. 4 obtained th...
Anand Pratap Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT312; 2002(4)MPLJ587
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. Petitioner, by this petition has called in question the action of the respondents in restraining the petitioner from operating the sand quarry in Survey No. 440 having an area of 5.248 hectares in Village Dhaniya Khedi, Tehsil Gyaraspur, District Vidisha.2. It is the case of the petitioner that in accordance with the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Minor Minerals Rules, 1996 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'Rules'), applications were invited by the Panchayat for considering the claim of eligible persons for grant of lease for mining of sand in the area in question. According to the petitioner, applications were processed and the same were considered in the meeting of the Gram Panchayat held on 25-5-2001. Petitioner's application was allowed and Patta was granted to the petitioner on the same date for a period of two years. It is the case of the petitioner that vide resolution dated 25-5-2001 Annexure P-9 it was resolved that Patta for two years be granted to...
Pandit Gms Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Recovery Officer, Debt Recove ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: IV(2004)BC300
ORDERA.M. Sopre, J.1. By filing this writ under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to assail the notice of sale and sale of property, situated at 503, M.G. Road, opposite Kothari Market, Indore. According to petitioner as can be gathered by mere reading of the writ, the sale of the property is being effected/accomplished on the orders of Debt Recovery Tribunal under the provisions of Debt Recovery Act. In substance, the grievance of writ petitioner is that the property belongs to petitioner and hence, it cannot be put to sale by the respondent No. 1 -Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur at the instance of respondent No. 2-Bank, who has obtained the decree against some other person but not against the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr. M.M. Asudani, learned Counsel for petitioner. 3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record ofthe case, I find no merit in the petition and hence, it deserves dismissal in lim...
Mohd. Idris Vs. Smt. Nigar Sultana and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: II(2003)DMC397
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 31.1.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Ujjain in Criminal Revision No. 30/2001 arising out of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ujjain in Misc. Cr. Case No. 31/1997 on 4.12.2000.2. In narrow compass, the case of the parties before the Court below was that the non-applicant No. 2 Smt. in the year 1992. Out of their wedlock, non-applicant No. 2 Aasifa-daughter was born. The non-applicants submitted an application Under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Trial Court on the grounds inter alia that the applicant was ill-treating the non-applicant/wife for demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- from her parents. She was carrying eight months' pregnancy and during that period on 14.4.1997, she was beaten and turned out of the house. The non-applicants prayed for grant of maintenance Rs. 1,500/- and Rs. 1,000/- per month respectively for the...
Prakash Chandra Vs. Rajkumari @ Jyoti
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC556; 2003(2)MPLJ324
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This appeal, Under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act')/ is directed against the order dated 14.10.1993 passed by First Additional District Judge, Khargone in Civil Suit No. 5-A/1984, whereby it allowed the application of the respondent which was filed Under Section 25 of the Act for grant of permanent alimony and maintenance.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant/husband filed divorce petition on 7.3.1984 against the respondent/wife Under Section 13 of the Act. The appellant/husband did not prosecute the same and ultimately the application for divorce was dismissed and thereafter the Trial Court considered the application of the respondent/wife Under Section 25 of the Act for grant of permanent alimony and maintenance and by the impugned order dated 14.10.1993 allowed the same and directed the appellant/husband to pay a sum of Rs. 500.00 per month to the respondent /wife as a permanent alimony and for maintenance w.e.f. 7.3.1...
Om Prakash Vs. Lalita Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: II(2003)DMC213
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. This appeal is directed Under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the judgment and decree passed on 16.1.1993 by the learned Additional Judge to the District Judge, Sendhwa (West Nimar) in Original Civil Suit No. 2-A/92. whereby dismissed the suit of the plaintiff for a decree of divorce.2. I have heard Mr. T.N. Singh, learned Counsel for appellant and Mr. S.K. Pawnekar, learned Counsel for respondent3. The submission of Mr. T.N. Singh is that in this case the apellant could not be examined as a witness because the appellant had examined one Om Prakash Gupta as a witness in support of his case due to the mistake of the Counsel for the appellant as he was in the impression that the said witness Om Prakash is the plaintiff who has been examined. It was also submitted that the respondent also could not produce any evidence, as the respondent and her witnesses could not appear on the date which was fixed for her evidence.4. Learned Counsel for respondent also...
Arun Kumar Vs. Smt. Gulabbai and 4 ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC296
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal No. 269 of 1999, Arun Kumar s/o Anandilal Agrawal v. Mangilal s/o Rugnath and Ors., as common facts of the case and questions are involved in both these appeals.2. This appeal is directed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against a common award dated 15.12.1998 passed by Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Biaora, District Rajgarh in Claim Case No. 104 of 1997, whereby exonerated the Insurance Company from its liability of compensation of Rs. 86,800.00 in favour of claimants/respondents.3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is the owner of tanker bearing registration number MP-09/K-3470 which was being driven by deceased Abul Hasan. On 28.9.1992 the said tanker was loaded with diesel going to Biaora from Narsinghgarh. Near Sonkutch turning there was some mechanical defect in the said tanker and the said tanker met with an accident. On account of the accident tanker caugh...
Shiv Shankar Bansal, Advocate and anr. Vs. Hakim Singh, T.i. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-06-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT(Cri)6; 2003(2)MPHT531; 2003(2)MPLJ79
ORDERFakhruddin, J.1. Briefly stated facts are that one Ashok alias Chhetake Jamdar was arrested under Sections 393, 341, 336 and 506B, IPC and Section 25-B of the Arms Act by the police. He was produced before the Magistrate. The application for police remand was made on the ground that the accused is absconder and is involved in tripple murders. The police remand was refused. Judicial Magistrate First Class, however, directed that if the judicial remand is required then application be filed. It is submitted that the judicial remand was not applied for and the accused was discharged by Judicial Magistrate First Class. The manner in which the accused was discharged by JMFC was reported to the police authorities and the District Magistrate. Certain Sanha entries were made and on that basis news were published in the newspapers. The applicants have annexed the press reports and the press clippings are marked as Annexures A-1, A-2 and A-3, and are from daily newspapers Navprabhat, Aachara...
Satyanarayan Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT39
S.L. Kochar, J.1. This criminal revision, has been preferred by the applicant against the judgment dated 15th July, 2002 rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 197/2000 by ASJ Manasa, arising out of the order dated 29th July, 2000 passed in Criminal Case No. 153/97 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Manasa, thereby convicting the applicant for the offences under Sections 279, 337 and 304A, IPC and sentencing him 3 months' RI with fine of Rs. 300/-, 6 months' RI with fine of Rs. 500/- and 1 year RI with fine of Rs. 500/- respectively. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently, in default of payment of fine, further, SI for 3 months on each count.2. Facts of the case lie in a narrow compass are that on 4th July, 97, complainant Ramgir was sitting in his betel shop. His son Tejgir @ Teji and one Ramcsh Soni were sitting on a bench nearby. At the relevant time, Commander Jeep bearing Registration No. MP-14B/8696 came from the direction of Manasa being drive rashly and negl...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »