Madhya Pradesh Court January 2003 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.
Suresh Dave Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3141; 2003(1)MPHT439
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This petition has been filed against the order dated 26-10-2002 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Mhow, District Indore in Cr. Revision No. 619/2002 arising out of the order dated 4-10-2002 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mhow in Cr. Case No. 277/2002 whereby dismissing the application of the applicant filed under Section 451/457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of Tata Sumo bearing Registration No. MP-09-S-5511 on interim custody of the applicant, he being a registered owner of the vehicle.2. The application of the applicant has been dismissed by both the Courts below on the ground that as per provisions under Section 47D of the M.P. Excise Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') the Criminal Court has no jurisdiction to release the vehicle on interim custody because, the District Magistrate has already initiated the proceedings against the applicant for confiscation of the vehicle and other seized property as per provisi...
Smt. Jankibai Verma Vs. Akramali and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)MPHT62
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Seoni, dated January 15, 1998, in Claim Case No. 23/96. 2. On 28-11-1994 at about 6 p.m., the claimant was going from Seoni to Tirodi with her son Dinesh, therefore, was standing on the road side. Akram Ali Khan came driving bus No. MPD 9674, rashly and negligently and crushed right leg of the claimant, resulting in permanent disability. She was taken to hospital at Seoni then to Nagpur Medical College where she remained indoor patient for 26 days. The claimant was doing stitching and knitting work earning Rs. 3,000/- per month. By this accident, she has suffered physically, mentally and financially, therefore, claimed Rs. 2,95,000/-. 3. Owner and driver of the offending vehicle have denied the taking place of accident and causing of injuries to the claimant in the leg, in the written statement filed by them. Therefore, they submit that the claim be dismissed. 4. United India Ins...
Shantilal (Bum Bum) Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT326
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. By filing this writ, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order, dated 12-10-2001 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No. 1, whereby petitioner has been disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Nagar Panchayat, Rajgarh for a period of five years. Facts relevant for the disposal of the writ which He in a narrow compass need mention in brief.2. Petitioner was elected as President of Nagar Panchayat, Rajgarh, District Dhar on 28-12-1999.3. On 24-4-2000, the State Election Commission (respondent No. 1) issued a show-cause notice (Annexure P-1) to petitioner inter alia saying therein that in terms of Section 32-B of M.P. Municipalities Act every contesting candidate at an election of President has to submit within 30 days with the officer notified by the State Election Commission an account of his election expenses. It was said that since petitioner failed to submit the accounts as per the requirement of Section 32-B hence, why an action of disqualification as...
Chandan Singh and anr. Vs. S.E.W. Construction Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC746; 2003ACJ1382
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. Through this appeal, award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in M.V.C. No. 7 of 2000, dated 7.11.2001, has been challenged by the claimants who are parents of deceased Ajay Senger.2. Material facts of the case are that in the morning of 4.10.1999 at about 10 a.m., Ajay Senger (deceased) met with an accident when dumper No. MP 10-A 5599 driven by Ashok Garhewal, owned by S.E.W. Construction Co. Ltd. and insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd., hit the motor cycle on which deceased was coming from the opposite side. As a result of this accident, deceased died on the spot. He was 27 years old, a brilliant student who, after completing degree in Master of Business Administration course, was selected by Maheshwar Hydel Power Corporation Ltd., Mandleshwar (Khargone) against the post of Management Trainee on contract basis for a period of 5 years. On the date of accident, he was being paid stipend of Rs. 6,000 per month. Looking to his bright career, he c...
S.V. Industries Vs. Secretary, Engineering Majdoor Sangh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2003
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR1018]; 2003(1)MPHT478
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The petitioner seeks to question the legality of the Recovery Certificate dated 20-2-2002 (Annexure P-2) issued by Upper Labour Commissioner, Indore, for Rs. 6,20,460/- by invoking the provisions of Section 33C(1) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Facts necessary for the disposal of petition need to be taken note of. 2. Petitioner is a manufacturing unit engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of certain type of capes which are used in Bulbs and Tubes. 3. On 4-7-2001 the petitioner claimed that they applied to the Labour Commissioner, Indore, by Annexure P-1 under Section 25M of the Industrial Disputes Act for seeking permission to effect lay off in their Unit. It is their case, that since Commissioner to whom, they applied for permission to effect lay off did not pass any order either granting or refusing permission for lay off and hence in terms of Section 25M(5) ibid the petitioner was deemed to have granted permission by the Commissioner. In other word...
Sagar Samir Production Vs. Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2003
Reported in: [2003]42SCL560(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case, I find no substance in the writ hence, it merits dismissal 2. What is challenged in this writ is a summon/notice, dated 2-12-1998 (Annexure P-4) issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. In fact, the respondent - a Bank has filed a suit against the petitioner for recovery of outstanding loan amount in Debt Recovery Tribunal. The suit was entertained by the Tribunal and accordingly, notice of suit was issued by the Tribunal to the petitioner (as Non applicant) requesting them (petitioner) to file written statement. It is against the issuance of this notice itself, the petitioner became aggrieved and filed this writ. Notice was issued to respondent. They are served and represented. 3. Heard Shri P.K. Saxena, learned senior counsel with Shri Rawka, counsel for petitioner and Shri Shastri, learned counsel for respondent.4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner was that ...
Shrikrishna Gupta Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT507
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record of the case, I find no merit in this writ petition. As a consequence, it fails and is dismissed in limine.2. Petitioner, who is working as an employee of Nagar Panchayat seeks to challenge his transfer order. The transfer order is challenged essentially on the ground that it was passed in quick succession. Petitioner says that he was posted to Kukshi by order dated 28-9-2002, which he complied with. It is this order of his posting to Kukshi which is cancelled by the impugned order dated 2-11-2002. This, according to-the petitioner, amounts to his subsequent transfer from one place to another and therefore, it is under challenge.3. I find no merit in this submission. The jurisdiction of the Writ Court is extremely limited in transfer cases. Transfer is always considered to be an incidence of service. It is indeed a part of service condition. An employee does not have a right to conten...
GramIn Vidyut Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Vs. Devideen Patel and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)MPHT58; 2003(3)MPLJ216
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. Petitioner, aggrieved by award of Labour Court, Jabalpur, in Case No. 98/99, ID Reference (Devideen Patel v. Junior Engineer, Gramin Vidyut Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Amarpatan, District Satna), has filed this petition. By impugned award dated 19-4-90, the Labour Court allowing the reference, directed that the respondent be reinstated with backwages.2. The contention of learned Counsel appearing for petitioner is that the Labour Court, Jabalpur had absolutely no jurisdiction or authority to entertain the dispute in respect of the termination of the services of the respondent. In this regard, reliance is placed by the petitioner on a judgment of Apex Court in R.C. Tiwari v. M.P. State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. [(1997) 5 SCC125] and two judgments of this Court in Vindhyachal Super Thermal Power Project, Sidhi v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Sidhi [1999 (2) LLN 413], and C.O.D. Employee Co-operative Society, Jabalpur v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court...
Dinesh Giri Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4366; 2003(2)MPHT318; 2003(2)MPLJ539
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J. 1. The applicant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 16(1)(a)(i) and 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and has been ordered to suffer sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default two months further Rigorous Imprisonment.2. In brief the case of prosecution is that on 23-3-1988, Food Inspector H.D. Dubey (P.W. 1) obtained sample of milk from the applicant who was carrying the milk for sale. It is said that the applicant was serving for Kabul Singh and was carrying the milk for him. The milk which was being carried by the applicant was said to be of cow and she buffalo. The Food Inspector after performing the necessary formalities sent the sample to the Public Analyst at Bhopal, which was received in the office of Public Analyst on 29-3-1993 vide Ex. P-9. The report of Public Analyst is Ex, P-12, according to which the impugned sample of ...
Manik Lal and ors. Vs. Rajaram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT29
K.K. Lahoti, J.1. Defendants aggrieved by judgment and decree passed by Lower Appellate Court by which reversing the judgment and decree of the Trial Court, suit of respondents/plaintiffs was decreed, have filed this second appeal. 2. Short facts are that, both the parties are closely related. Genealogical tree showing their relationship is as under :-- Puhkar | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | | | | | Bhagwat Rabuda Galau Khuman Mutkai Tidka (D-1925) (D-1946) (D-1932) (D-1947) (D-1948) (D-issueless) | | | | | | | | | | --------------------- | | | | | | | =Budia =|Chhutuwadi |@ Mohan Samanua @Mahraiwali |Mahroiwali | (D-1967) | | | = Sudhia | ------------------------------- | | | | | Natthoolal | Bhassu @ | | Dharamdas (D-6) | | | ----------------------------------- | | | | | Manik Sundar Sukhlal | (D-1) (D-2) | ----------------------------------- | | | | Jamuna Girdhari Daduli Jhulli (D-4) (D-5) (Pre-D. Puhar) (D-3) -----------------...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »