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.
State of M.P. Vs. Govind Prasad and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)MPHT475
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the acquittal of the accused/respondents by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh, by order dated September 9, 1989, passed in S.T. No. 14/88. 2. Briefly, prosecution case is that on 1-11-1987 at about 7 p.m., in front of Indore Bank, the accused/respondents took away Rs. 640/- from the complainant Dulichand by causing injuries with knife. In this incident, accused Govind caused injury to left thigh of the complainant by knife and the accused Ramesh gave 2-3 slaps to him and took away Rs. 640/-. The matter was reported to the police. Dulichand subjected to medical examination. Accordingly, case under Section 394 of IPC was registered against the accused, but later, challan was filed under Section 394/397 of IPC. 3. The accused denied commission of offence and alleged that they have been involved in the case due to rivalry. Two questions fell for considerations before the Trial Court, namely, whether the accused voluntarily ...
Daya Ram and anr. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT435
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. The questions of law involved being similar and the writ petitions being inter linked and inter connected were heard analogously and are hereby disposed of by this common order. As the pleadings are complete in W.P. No. 4072/2002, for the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts stated therein are adumbrated.2. Before we proceed to state the facts we may profitably refer to a paragraph from the decision rendered in the case of R.S. Joshi, Sales Tax Officer, Gujarat and Ors. v. Ajit Mills Ltd. and another, (1997) 4 SCC 98, wherein Krishna Iyer, J., in his inimitable style expressed thus :-- '2. A prefactory caveat.-- When examining a legislation from the angle of its vires, the Court has to be resilient, not rigid, forward-looking, not static, liberal, not verbal - in interpreting the organic law of the nation. We must also remember the constitutional proposition enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Munn v. Illinois viz., 'that Courts do not substitute their...
Global Polymers and Impex Ltd. Vs. Dan-inject Aps
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: I(2004)BC415
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a company petition filed by petitioner under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, seeking winding up of the respondent company by name Global Polymers and Impex Ltd. hereinafter referred to as 'Company' essentially on the ground covered under Section 433(e) of Companies Act.2. The Company is having its place of business and registered office at Indore. It is infer alia engaged in the business of importers, exporters, manufacturer, wholesalers, dealers and commission agents in various kinds of animal feed, poultry feed, etc. as set out in Memorandum of Association.3. It is the say of the petitioner that in its business activity, the petitioner supplied and delivered to the company certain veterinary equipments on 31.3.1998, 18.4.1998 and 8.9.1998 valuing about Rs. 5,69,480.00. It is this amount, which the petitioner complains the company has neglected to pay to petitioner despite receipt of goods from the petitioner. It is complained that petitioner made de...
Banshilal and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4790; 2003(2)MPLJ369
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. Applicants have filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 332/2002 registered at Police Station Yashodharman Nagar, Mandsaur, for the offence under Section 34-A of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915 (for short 'the Act').2. The allegation against the applicants is about the recovery of 56 litres of liquor from their possession. The applicants are in custody w.e.f. 20-11-2002. Charge-sheet has been filed. The learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur rejected the application on the ground that in view of Section 59-A (ii) of the Act the Court is not having any power to grant bail to the applicants.3. The submission of Shri Jaisingh is that since the charge-sheet has been filed and the offence under Section 34-A is punishable under Sub-section (2) of Section 34 of the Act for imprisonment of a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to three years and with fine wh...
Sanjay Shrivastava Vs. Surendra Kumar Soni and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ1030
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. Through this appeal, award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Satna in Claim Case No. 117 of 1999 dated 25.4.2001, has been challenged.2. On 2.7.1999, claimant was travelling in the jeep, bearing registration No. MP 19-A 7843 along with his family. He was going to Banda in connection with the marriage of his sister-in-law. The jeep owned by Poornanand Soni driven rashly and negligently by Surendra Kumar Soni and insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. dashed against culvert and turned turtle. As a result of this accident, the claimant and his family suffered serious injuries and K.L. Shrivastava (father-in-law) died. Claimant suffered fracture of ribs resulting in serious injuries to parts around and under, fracture of pelvic bone, rupture of urethra, injuries to head and right hand, etc. He was hospitalised from 2.7.1999 to 20.8.1999 at Satna, Jabalpur and later on in Bombay also. Permanent disability suffered by the claimant is stated to be more than 70 per ce...
Premchand Khatwani and ors. Vs. Gopal Thakre and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ980
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 5.10.2001, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in Claim Case No. 46 of 2000.2. Shortly stated, the accident took place on 18.10.1999 when Tempo-Trax bearing No. MH 35-C 9670, driven rashly and negligently, hit the motor cycle bearing No. MP 22-D 2663, of the deceased resulting in his death on the spot and pillion rider Ashok Chawla received injuries. The allegation is that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the Tempo-Trax. The Claims Tribunal has accepted this allegation, therefore, recorded finding against the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, which was insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., rejecting thereby the defence taken by respondents in this case. Evidence perused. It is clearly a case of accident committed on account of rash and negligent driving of Tempo-Trax by its driver, therefore, finding of the Tribunal on this aspect is confirmed.3. Serious dispute aris...
Kalkaprasad and anr. Vs. Dilip Kumar Pal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: I(2006)ACC115; 2005ACJ1797
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. These two appeals M.A. No. 223 of 2001 (Kalkaprasad v. Dilip Kumar Pal) and M.A. No. 224 of 2001 (Neetu Suryawanshi v. Dilip Kumar Pal), are proposed to be decided by this judgment since they arise out of the same accident and common award, though Kumari Neetu Suryawanshi has filed separate appeal (M.A. No. 224 of 2001) and the appellants Kalkaprasad and Kantibai have filed M.A. No. 223 of 2001 for enhancement of compensation for personal injuries to them and death of their son, Satish.2. On 22.7.1996, at about 9 p.m., the accident took place when jeep bearing registration No. MP 28-A 157, driven rashly and negligently by Dilip Kumar Pal, driver/owner of the same, fell into a ditch. The occupants of the jeep, Kalkaprasad, Kantibai and Neetu suffered personal injuries while Satish died on the spot. The claimants filed claim petitions seeking compensation for personal injuries and death of Satish alleging rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its owner/driver. T...
indbank Merchant Banking Services Ltd. Vs. Kedia Great Galleon Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: [2004]121CompCas468(MP); (2003)3CompLJ322(MP); [2004]51SCL119(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1.The decision rendered in this company petition shall govern disposal of other two connected company petitions being Company Petition No. 17 of 2000 and Company Petition No. 15 of 2001, as all these company petitions are filed against one company and, secondly, it is for seeking winding up of respondent company (hereinafter referred to as 'company').2. This petition is filed under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act seeking winding up of company on the allegations that it (company) has failed to pay the money. In other words, the winding up of company is sought on the ground that company is deemed unable to repay the debt of petitioner as per Section 433(e) of the Companies Act. The petitioner has then in petition set out the details of the amount paid to company which according to petitioner remains outstanding giving them the cause of action to serve a statutory notice to the company under Section 434 of the Act and then filing this company petition under Section ...
Patesh Kumar Vs. Mayank and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: II(2003)DMC125
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. It is a writ under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It is filed to challenge an interim order, dated 27.9.2002, passed in Civil Suit No. 23-A of 1996 by District Judge, Jhabua on an application made by the applicants for claiming interim maintenance under the provisions of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act.2. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record of the case, I find absolutely no merit in this writ.3. The need to file this writ has arisen, because according to petitioner he has no right to file civil revision which he could have filed earlier Under Section 115 of C.P. Code i.e. prior to amendment in the C.P.C. which was brought into effect from 1.7.2002. Indeed, no writ lies against an interim order much less under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. That apart, when I read the impugned order, I find absolutely no merit in this writ. It is quite a reasoned order and hence, does not call for any interfere...
Shashikant Bedekar Vs. the Indore Paraspar Sahakari Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)MPHT28
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case, I find no merit in the writ.2. It is a writ under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It seeks to challenge the order, dated 18-10-2000 (Annexure P-8) whereby it is held that claim submitted by the petitioner before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society is barred by limitation. The petitioner is not satisfied with the impugned order hence, has come up in writ.3. Petitioner (since retired) was an employee of respondent No. 1-a Co-operative Bank. He had some grievance about less payment of salary as compared to his juniors amounting to Rs. 5,253/- and also about his claim of Seniority. He therefore, filed a dispute on 3-11-1983 before the Deputy Registrar under Section 64 read with Section 55 of the Act. It is this dispute which was held to be time barred and secondly held to have been filed under Section 55 (2) of the Act rather than that of Section 64 of the Act....
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »