Madhya Pradesh Court January 2003 Judgments
Hargyan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2936; 2003(3)MPLJ171
S.S. Jha, J.1. This reference which has been made to resolve the controversy arising out of conflicting decision of the Single Bench of this Court. Conflicting views have arisen on the point whether a complaint for an offence under Section 379, IPC read with Section 39 of Indian Electricity Act is maintainable on the complaint of Electrical Inspector or an officer of the Electricity Board is also competent to file the complaint.2. The only question involved in the case is whether under Section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act, prosecution can be lodged on the complaint of the officers of M. P. Electricity Board.3. For the purpose of examining the controversy it is necessary to examine the provision of Section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act which deals with institution of prosecution. Section 50 of the Act is reproduced hereinbelow:'Section 50-- Institution of prosecutions.-- No prosecution shall be instituted against any person for any offence against this Act or any Rule, licence or...
Tag this Judgment!Arun Kumar Thapar Vs. Yashwant Indapurkar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1946; 2003(2)MPLJ273
S.S. Jha, J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of both the appeals, viz., Misc. Appeal Nos. 599 and 609 of 1997.2. Misc. Appeal No. 599 of 1997 is filed by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation whereas Misc. Appeal No. 609 of 1997 is filed by the owner of the vehicle claiming therein that there should be joint liability of the State Bank of India and the owner of the vehicle for payment of compensation.3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant in M.A. No. 609 of 1997 is the owner of the jeep bearing registration No. CPW 100. This jeep was hired by the State Bank of India on a written agreement, Exh. D-2. As per the term of the agreement, the vehicle was taken on hire at the rate of Rs. 1,200 per month by the bank on the conditions enumerated in the agreement Exh. D-2. On 31.5.1982 when the claimant along with one Om Prakash Jain was travelling from Gwalior to Delhi in his car bearing registration No. CPW 179 when the car has proceeded about half kilometre from R...
Tag this Judgment!Chanda Devi Vs. Rajendra Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: III(2004)ACC860; 2004ACJ634
Bhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Katni in Claim Case No. 17 of 1989 dated 31.10.1996.2. Shortly stated, Pramod Kumar (the deceased) was going from Katni Chowk towards Mission Chowk at 18.10 hours on 15.10.1988 on scooter No. CIJ 8641. Vehicle bearing registration No. MBK 7252 driven rashly and negligently by Rajendra Singh hit the scooter resulting in serious injuries to the deceased who fell unconscious. He was shifted to hospital at Katni where he died on 25.10.1988. The matter was reported to the police and case registered under Sections 279, 337 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code. The vehicle was impounded and given on supratnama to Premlal Jar, owner of the same. Claimants are parents of the deceased. At the time of accident, the deceased was 25 years old working with Bhagwati Agencies as store keeper earning Rs. 500 per month and also painting hoardings and boards earning Rs. 400 per month. He wanted to join the A...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sugan Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: II(2003)ACC349; II(2003)ACC349; 2005ACJ1547
Deepak Verma and S.L. Kochar, JJ.1. I.A. No. 4298 of 2002 has been filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for early hearing of the appeal on merits. The application is allowed and the appeal is heard on merits.2. This appeal is at the instance of the insurance company against the award passed by Third Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ratlam in M.C. No. 36 of 1998, decided on 31.1.2000 wherein on account of death of Fulsinghji in a motor accident, his wife and daughter respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein have been awarded a sum of Rs. 1,23,200.3. The grievance of the insurance company is that at the relevant point of time, respondent No. 3, the driver of the vehicle was not holding a valid licence to drive a transport vehicle.4. However, it has not been disputed before us that he was holding a licence to drive private light motor vehicle but it did not contain an effective endorsement made by the licensing authority entitling him to drive a transport vehicle too. However, this point, as...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sudha Verma and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ772; 2003(2)MPHT12
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shahdol in Claim Case No. 3 of 1990, dated December 30, 1993. 2. Shortly stated, accident took place on 14-6-1987 when Bus No. MBA 9393 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 6 Chhotelal, owned by Shriram Khanna and insured with National Insurance Company Limited, dashed against tree resulting in the death of Suresh Prasad Verma (28), husband of Smt. Sudha Verma and father of three children-- claimants in this case. He was Peon in Central Bank of India, Shahdol receiving monthly salary of Rs. 1,187/-, The defence of Insurance Company is that the driver did not possess valid driving licence to drive the vehicle and that liability is limited to Rs. 15,000/- per passenger in terms of Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Claims Tribunal holds that accident took place, as alleged. With regard to driving licence, finding is that this issue is not proved. Compensation of...
Tag this Judgment!Shantabai Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: I(2003)DMC529
S.L. Kochar, J.1. Appellant Shantabai has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 22.4.1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in Sessions Trial No. 12/1999, thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 3,000/-. In default of payment of fine, she was directed to suffer R.I. for two years.2. Facts of the prosecution case as unfolded before the Trial Court were that on 22.9.1998 at about 3.30 p.m., Chowkidar Bajesingh (P.W. 5) was sitting at the temple of village Pir Piplaya. At that juncture, Vikramsingh (P.W. 4) came there and informed that Laxmibai w/o Jagdish had fallen in the septic tank of her latrine. Bajesingh thereupon went to the house of Jagdish and found the dead body of Laxmibai floating in the septic tank. With the help of Chhitarsingh (P.W. 3) and one Rupsingh, the dead body of Laxmibai was taken out of the septic tank. Bajesingh infor...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Kumar Arya Vs. Ashok Rathore and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ327
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Betul in Claim Case No. 23 of 1992 dated 8.7.1994.2. Briefly, claimant Vijay Kumar Arya (35) was going on his motor cycle No. 05- 6599 with his sister to Karonji Deel on 3.1.1992. Matador bearing the registration No. MOC 8819 driven by Ashok Rathore, owned by Dilip Kumar and insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. hit the claimant as a result of which both the occupants of motor cycle fell down. Claimant sustained serious head injury. He was first taken to Chicholi, then to Padhar and finally to Nagpur for treatment. For repair of motor cycle, he spent Rs. 5,000. Compensation of Rs. 1,42,500 has been claimed. The respondents have filed their statements in this case. Allegations have been denied and it is stated that the accident took place due to negligence of the claimant who was driving motor cycle on the wrong side and hit Matador. He did not possess a driving licence and was dru...
Tag this Judgment!i.M. Siddiqui Vs. Mohd. Rafiq and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ2110
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal in Claim Case No. 94 of 1993, dated 29.4.1994.2. Shortly stated, claimant is Assistant Engineer in Water Resources Department, Government of M.P., Bhopal. On 15.4.93, at about 6.15 p.m., he was standing near kirana shop of Mahesh Chand Jain, Sewa Sadan, TT Nagar, Bhopal, and buying some kirana articles. Mohd. Rafiq, driver of minibus No. MP 04-0990, owned by Chandni Bi, insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd., strode into the shop. The claimant was run over by the bus. One died while claimant suffered compound fracture of ilium right side and fracture of tibia and fibula left leg, apart from other injuries. He was admitted in Hamidia Hospital, Bhopal, later shifted to Gokuldas Hospital, Indore. Two major and two minor operations were performed on various dates. The allegation is that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the bus by Mohd. Rafiq. As a res...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sudha Verma and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC552
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shahdol in Claim Case No. 3 of 199C dated 30.12.1993.2. Shortly stated, accident took place on 14.6.1987 when bus No. MBA 9393 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 6 Chhotelal, owned by Shriram Khanna and insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd., dashed against tree resulting in the death of Suresh Prasad Verma (28), husband of Sudha Verma and father of three children, claimants in this case. He was peon in Central Bank of India, Shahdol, receiving monthly salary of Rs. 1,187. The defence of Insurance Company is that the driver did not possess valid driving licence to drive the vehicle and that its liability is limited to Rs. 15,000 per passenger in terms of Section 95 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Claims Tribunal holds that accident took place, as alleged. With regard to driving licence, finding is that this issue is not proved. Compensation of Rs. 2,10,300 is awarded carry...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Kumar Khatik Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)MPHT221; 2003(2)MPLJ465
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order (Annexure P-1) passed by Janpad Panchayat, Pipariya by which the services of the petitioner were terminated and appeal and revision filed against were also dismissed by Collector, Hoshangabad by order (Annexure P-4) and by Commissioner, Hoshangabad, in Revision No. 8/Nigrani/2001-2002 (Annexure P-6) on 6-6-2002.2. The allegation against the petitioner is that in column No. 12 of Form (Annexure R/4-1), he concealed the information that the criminal case was pending against him under Sections 324/34 and 294, IPC on the date whenhe was appointed as per order (Annexure R/4-3) 30th July, 1998. After submitting the Form (Annexure R/4-1) the authority enquired from the police and as per report (Annexure R/4-5) dated 1-2-99, Inspector General, Bhopal informed to the Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat, Pipariya, Hoshangabad that a criminal case against petitioner under Sections 341, 294, 323, 324...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »