Madhya Pradesh Court November 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.
Smt. Seema Arora Vs. Dinesh Kumar Arora
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT40; 2004(2)MPLJ566
A.K. Shrivastava, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 8-1-2003 passed by Presiding Officer of Family Court, Gwalior in Case No. 63-A/2002 (Hindu Marriage Act), decreeing the application filed under Section 13(1)(i-a) and Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the wife has preferred this appeal,2. Admitted facts are that the appellant and respondent were married on 21-1-91 at Gwalior and thereafter a female child was born from their wedlock.3. In brief the case of the husband/plaintiff is that soon after the marriage he came to know that the behaviour of his wife is unusual and quarrelsome. She happens to hurled the abuses. She also happens to take bath during odd hours in the night. On being enquired by the plaintiff/husband, the mother of the wife told that after the delivery of a child, she would become normal. But, when the husband did not notice any change, even after female child was born, he examined the appellant at ...
Smt. Anika Bi Vs. Anees Ahmad Siddiqui and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-2003
Reported in: AIR2005MP64; 2004(1)MPLJ315
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is plaintiff's appeal under Section 96, C.P.C. against, judgment and decree by which her suit for declaration that she is the owner of the house in dispute and for permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from interfering with her possession has been dismissed.2. It is not in dispute that Mustaq Ahmad was owner of House No. 42 situated near Old Imambada, Lakherapura, Bhopal as per boundaries shown in para 1 of the plaint. The house in dispute is in occupation of two tenants.3. The plaintiffs case is that her husband Mustaq Ahmad had given the house in dispute to her in lieu of her dower and she became the owner of this house. She has further pleaded that two tenants living in this house are her tenants. In the alternative she has pleaded to have acquired title to the house by adverse possession.4. The defendants's case is that the story of giving the house by Mustaq Ahmad to the plaintiff in lieu of dower is false. They pleaded that this house was sold ...
Mittal Contracts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ircon International Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)ARBLR130(MP); 2004(1)MPHT87; 2004(2)MPLJ190
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') for appointment of Arbitrator.2. The applicant was contractor in the Work of Indoor Museum at Indira Gandhi Rashtriya Manav Sangrahalaya Phase I Package II at Bhopal. This company was awarded this contract by the non-applicant. Dispute arose between the parties regarding payment of certain bills. Clause 3.54.1 of the agreement incorporates the arbitration clause. It is as under:--'Except where otherwise provided for in the contract all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of instructions hereinbefore mentioned or as to any other question, claim, right, matter of anything whatsoever, in any arising out of or relating to the contract, specifications, estimates, instructions, orders or these conditions or otherwise concerning the works, or these execution or failure to execute the same whether arising during the progress of t...
Kamdhenu Housing Co-operative Society Vs. Nagar Nigam
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT322; 2004(3)MPLJ240
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree by which its suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendant/Municipal Corporation from demolishing the building constructed by the plaintiff has been dismissed.2. It is not in dispute that the plaintiff has constructed a building on Plot No. 196 in M.P. Nagar, Bhopal. It obtained the building permission dated 4-12-1986 (Ex. P-1). The plaintiff has, however, constructed the mezzanine floor and third floor without the permission of the Municipal Corporation. The defendant sent two notices under Section 307(2) of the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has challenged those notices and sought the relief of injunction.3. The plaintiffs case is that it had submitted an application for condonation of the additional erection but that has not been considered by the defendant. The defendant denied that any such application for comp...
Oriental Bank of Commerce Vs. Mrs. Rajrani
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2005MP49; 2004(1)MPHT462; 2004(1)MPLJ470
1. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 8-8-1997 by IXth Additional District Judge, Gwalior, dismissing its suit for recovery of Rs. 25,234.92 paise from the respondent this appeal has been preferred by the appellant/Creditor.2. This appeal is heard ex-parte as the respondent after service of notice of final hearing of this appeal initially appointed a lawyer to represent her but later on chose to remain absent and failed to appear in spite of S.P.C.3. Facts giving rise to this appeal in brief are that one Shyam Behal had taken a loan of Rs. 20,000/- from the appellant/Bank. He had agreed to pay interest on it at the rate of 12% per annum with quarterly rest. He also agreed to refund the amount in sixty instalments. Various documents were executed by that debtor Shyam Behal in favour of the appellant/Bank. The said Shyam Behal did make certain payments last of which was of Rs. 500/-, made on 10-12-1986. Thereafter, no payments were made by him till his death on 26-3-1988. The res...
Alok Kumar JaIn Vs. Mrs. Rajni Bala Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Reported in: I(2004)DMC769
A.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellant/defendant has filed this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the judgment and decree dated 24.7.1997 in Civil Suit No. 51-A/1982 (New No. 11-A/1989) passed by the IIIrd Additional District Judge Ratlam, whereby the petition filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion was dismissed.2. Admitted facts of the case are that the marriage in between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 29.1.1982. at Ajmer according to the Hindu rites and customs and that they have no issue from the wedlock. It is also not in dispute that the defendant wife has lived only for about two months with her husband after the marriage and, thereafter, on 30.5.1982 the respondent has left the matrimonial house at Ratlam and went back to her maternal house at Ajmer and, thereafter, she did not return back to live with her husband. It is also a common ground that the respondent has filed on application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. for maintenanc...
Smt. Geeta Devi Mishra and ors. Vs. Anil Kumar Tiwari and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ424; 2004(1)MPHT82; 2004(1)MPLJ373
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an appeal by the claimants against the order by which their application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') for compensation on the principle of 'no fault' has been rejected.2. There was an accident on 11-12-2000 near Village Dhandhari on the road in which Vikrant Mishra died. Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are his parents. Jeep No. M.P. 18-B/4175 was involved in this accident. It was being driven by respondent No. 1 Anil Kumar Tiwari and it was owned by respondent No. 2 Gajendra Pratap Singh. It was insured with respondent No. 3 New India Insurance Company Limited.3. The Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Tribunal') awarded an amount of Rs. 25,000/- as compensation under Section 140 of the Act against the owner and the driver and not against the Insurance Company. The insurer has been exonerated on the ground that there has been a breach of the condition of th...
Laxmibai Vs. Suresh Chandra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC165
A.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellant/defendant has filed this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the judgment and decree dated 31.8.2001 in Civil Suit No. 62/2000 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Shujalpur, whereby the marriage was dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.2. Admitted facts of the case are that the marriage in between the petitioner and the defendant was solemnized in the year 1992 according to the Hindu rites and customs and that they have no issue from the wedlock. It is also not in dispute that the appellant wife is living separately from the respondent-petitioner from 1996 and that the petitioner has filed this divorce petition on 9.12.2000. It is also not in dispute that the appellant has lodged a report in the police against her husband and her husband along with his Bhabhi has been convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class for an offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.3....
Ashok D. Bhatia Vs. Managing Director, Food Corporation of India and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT177
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the action of the respondent Nos. 1 to 5; Food Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the 'FCI'), of making deduction of the employer's contribution from the provident fund of the petitioner for the period of his suspension from 7-7-1984 to 11-2-1997, an amount of Rs. 88,304/- was deducted on the ground that the period has been treated to be not spent on duty for all the purpose.2. Petitioner was appointed as Godown Clerk, redesignated as Assistant Grade-Ill on 5-1-1967, his services were taken over by the FCI. On 13-7-1973, petitioner was promoted as Assistant Grade-II. He was suspended on 7-7-1984. Petitioner was prosecuted in a criminal case under Section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. As the suspension of the petitioner continued for long, petitioner filed three writ petitions; one for revocation of the suspension and another for payment of the proper amount of subsistence allowance and in...
Sardar Gurucharan Singh Vs. Mahendra Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT437; 2004(1)MPLJ252
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff under Section 96 C.P.C. against the judgment and decree by which his suit for specific performance of contract has been dismissed.2. It is not in dispute that defendant No. 6 Smt. Nirmala Raghuvanshi was owner of Plot No. J-203-A of Shahanshah Garden, Govindpura, Bhopal. She agreed to sell one fourth of this plot to plaintiff Gurucharan Singh by agreement dated 8-3-1989 (photocopy of agreement is Ex. P-1) for Rs. 29,700/-and received an advance of Rs. 2,200/- from him. There was some encroachment on this plot and therefore, the sale-deed could not be executed. On 6-5-1989 the plaintiff's father cancelled the agreement and made an endorsement to this effect on the back of the agreement. He received back the amount of Rs. 2,200/- on that date. The original agreement was returned to the defendant No. 6. That was filed by her in some criminal case and that was requisitioned by the Trial Court at the time of evidence.3. The plaintiff's case was that he ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »