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.
Mohanlal Badrilal Vs. Hope Textiles Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CompLJ90(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this company petition shall also govern disposal of other connected company petition being Company Petition No. 1 of 1989. 2. It is a company petition filed by what the petitioner calls themselves to be one of the creditor of the respondent-company. It is a petition essentially filed under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking winding up of respondent company--known as Hope Textiles Limited, Indore. It is essentially founded on the allegations that petitioner had supplied certain material (cotton) to the respondent company' valuing Rs. 10,72,153.10 paise between the period 24.1.1981 to 15.11.1981. It is averred that respondent company made part payment, but did not pay full, thereby leaving an outstanding of Rs. 2,02,573.71 paise. It is averred that it is for recovery of this outstanding balance, the petitioner sent legal notice demanding the sum and since the respondent-company failed to pay the sum despite notice sent under ...
Mohammed Juber Adil Vs. Smt. Taj Nazar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC19
S.L. Kochar, J.1. This revision has been filed by the applicant/husband against the order dated 16.4.2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khachrod, District Ujjain in Criminal Revision No. 3/2002 setting aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Khachrod, in Criminal Case No. 24/2001 on 18th September, 2001.2. For disposal of this revision, the facts in short before the Courts below was that the applicant and non-applicant were legally wedded husband and wife. After marriage, the applicant started ill-treatment with non-applicant/wife. She was also turned out of the house. Therefore, non-applicant/wife submitted an application for grant of maintenance in her favour under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Code')- She has also filed an application for fixing interim maintenance till final disposal of the main application.3. Applicant/husband, on his appearance submitted the reply controverting the allegations levelled b...
Jagdish Vs. Raushalbai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC587
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. The appellant/husband has filed this appeal Under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act challenging the part of the decree by which the Trial Court has passed a decree of divorce as well as for return of Istridhan to the value of Rs. 35,100.00.2. The only submission of Mr. C.L. Yadav, learned Counsel for appellant is that the gifts and amount given in the marriage to the husband is not a part of Istridhan. Therefore, Court has wrongly passed the decree for that property. He submitted that in Para No. 6 of the plaint, a sum of Rs. 6,900.00 have been claimed towards the gifts given to the bridegroom which is not part of Istridhan. Therefore, the decree for the said amount be set aside or modified.3. Mr. Jain, learned Counsel for respondent supported the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court.4. I have heard learned Counsels for the parties and perused the record as well as the pleadings of Para No. 6 of the plaint. Though Under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage...
Amrat Vs. Thagibai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC441
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23rd November, 1994 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 22-A/92 by Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Sendhwa whereby Court dismissed the suit filed Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of divorce.2. The brief facts of the case are that the husband filed petition Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the allegation that the marriage took place between the plaintiff and the defendants 17 to 20 years before, out of this wedlock the defendant is having 3 children. Eldest daughter Sangeeta is 13-years; son Vijyendra is aged about 10 years, and younger son, Jitendra is aged about 7 years. For last some years both are residing separately. The daughter Sangeeta and son Jitendra are residing with the defendant-wife and another son Vijyendra is residing with the plaintiff-husband. Plaintiff filed the petition on the ground that the behaviour of the wife is not decent and she is alwa...
Kanwarlal Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)MPHT402
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This revision has been filed by the applicant against the judgment dated 31-7-98 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhanpura, Distt. Mandsaur in Cr. Appeal No. 35/97 arising out of the judgment dated 24-12-96 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhanpura, District Mandsaur in Cr. Case No. 161/83 convicting the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for brevity 'the Act') and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for six months and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer further R.I. for two months.2. The applicant has been convicted for selling adulterated Namkeen-Sev prepared from gram-flour (Besan). Sample was taken on 18-2-93 by the Food Inspector. According to the Public Analyst report (Ex. P-5), the sample was not containing any foreign matter, insect or infection etc., but, it contained the starch. The sample was not upto the standard as prescribed...
State of M.P. Vs. Mathura Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT148
ORDERR.B. Dixit, J.1. The respondent No. I/petitioner was aggrieved with his order of retirement dated 13-2-92 by which he was treated to be retired w.c.f. 1-6-1988 instead of 31-7-1990.2. The applicant was initially appointed as Constable in the Police Department of erstwhile Madhya Bharat State w.e.f. 1-6-1950. The applicant in his service record mentioned that he had the qualification of Middle Class. It was alleged that at the time of completion of service-roll without asking him to produce a certificate of Middle Examination, he was compelled to write an imaginary date of birth (1-6-1930) and was asked to sign the service roll.3. Although, a departmental enquiry was started against him for changing his date of birth in service record, however, the order of retiring him from service was passed. The learned State Administrative Tribunal by the impugned order observed that the order of retirement was passed without affording applicant any proper opportunity of hearing and consequentl...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›