Madhya Pradesh Court December 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.
Balaram and anr. Vs. Madan Gir
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-2003
Reported in: III(2004)BC456
A.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellants/defendants have filed this appeal under Section 100, CPC against the judgment and decree dated 13.8.87 in Civil Appeal No. 30-B/84 passed by the learned VIth Additional District Judge Indore, confirming the judgment and decree dated 27.4.83 in Civil suit No. 49-B/79 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Class-II, Depalpur.2. Admitted facts of the case are that the defendants are father and son and the plaintiff used to pledge his gold and silver ornaments to the defendant and that the plaintiff in Aasad Badi II Samvat 2031 has pledged 4 Tolas of gold and 200 Tolas of silver ornaments (40 articles in number) to the defendants for an amount of Rs. 9,888/-. That the plaintiff had sent a registered notice dated 14.11.78 for the return of his ornaments and the defendant had sent a reply Of the notice.3. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendants have not returned the alleged ornaments to the plaintiff in spite of the notice dated 14.11.78 and as such the def...
Geeta Rani Biswas and ors. Vs. Gurukripa Travels and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-2003
Reported in: III(2004)ACC112; 2005ACJ1377
S.S. Jha and Subhash Samvatsar, JJ.1. By this judgment M.A. Nos. 74 and 115 of 1998 are decided as both the appeals arise out of common award.2. In this appeal only question involved in this case is regarding quantum of compensation and whether respondent Durgabai is entitled for compensation on account of death of Dr. Surendra Kumar Biswas. Other findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal are not under challenge.3. The Claims Tribunal has recorded a finding that since documents pertaining to payment of income tax have not been produced in the court, therefore, it is presumed that income of deceased was not more than Rs. 28,000 per annum and determined yearly dependency at Rs. 18,660.4. We have gone through the evidence on record. PW 1 Geeta Rani, wife of the deceased, has deposed in para 4 of her deposition that income of the deceased was Rs. 7,000 per month. She has further deposed that the deceased was having two dispensaries one at Raisen and other at village Ganjbasoda in District V...
Shishupal Singh Vs. the District Magistrate
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT122
ORDERS.L. Jain, J.1. Invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Shishupal Thakur, the brother of detenue Nekpal Singh has filed this petition for quashment of the order of detention dated 24-11-2003 passed by Distt. Magistrate, Damoh in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. It is alleged by the petitioner that his brother Nekpal Singh was arrested by police on 24-11-2003 in compliance of the aforesaid order of the District Magistrate and has been detained at Central Jail, Jabalpur. It is also alleged that the police forwarded the list of the cases pending against the brother of the petitioner in different Courts, to the District Magistrate, Damoh, who on the basis of those cases, without application of mind ordered detention of Nekpal Singh.3. Learned Counsel for the State has denied the allegations made in the petiti...
Ramesh Pratap Singh (Dead) and ors. Vs. Smt. Vimla Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)ARBLR147(MP); 2004(1)MPHT197; 2004(2)MPLJ135
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') against the order by which the application under Section 34 of the Act for setting aside the arbitral award has been rejected as barred by limitation.2. The relevant dates are that the arbitral award was made on 18-5-1997. A photocopy of this award was given to the parties on 19-5-1997. It was not 'signed' by all the Arbitrators. The applicants asked for 'signed copy' of the arbitral award as per Section 31(5) of the Act. The signed copy was supplied to them on 27-7-1998. The application under Section 34 of the Act was submitted before the Court on 27-8-1998.3. Section 34(3) of the Act provides as under:--'(3) An application for setting aside may not be made after three months have elapsed from the date on which the party making that application had received the arbitral award or, if a request had been made under Section 33, from the date o...
Nirbhay Singh Kushwaha Vs. State and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT263; 2004(1)MPLJ478
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Though this petition has been listed today for final hearing, however, on the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, they are heard finally.The petitioner who was serving on the post of Forester has been dismissed from the service on account of mis-conduct of illegal gratification. According to the respondents, the petitioner took Rs. 20/- from Mawasi, Rs. 25/- from Bhojya, Rs. 15/- from Sundara and Rs. 10/- from Kishna, in total Rs. 70/- in presence of one Pannalal. Neither Pannalal nor these persons have been examined in the departmental enquiry. If that be the position, in my opinion, even if some person, namely Gumani, on the basis of hearsay evidence had said that the petitioner has taken Rs. 70/- from some persons, would not suffice. As the material witnesses whose evidence would go to the root of the matter have not been examined, in my opinion, the charge has not at all been proved and the finding recorded by the enquiry officer is perverse and ...
Devisingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT217
S.L. Kochar J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 13th April, 1998 rendered in Sessions Trial No. 31/98 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Nimar, Sendhwa, thereby finding the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, convicted and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine the appellant is directed to suffer R.I. for one year.2. The brief history of the prosecution case is that on 22-11-97 at about 3.00 P.M. in Village Mandvi, the appellant assaulted his wife Junabai by axe on a money dispute. She was completely beheaded. At that time she was carrying pregnancy. The incident was witnessed by the mother of the appellant namely Jaidabai (P.W. 1). In the noon at about 3.00 P.M. she overheard the shouts of appellant Devisingh and his wife Junabai. She woke up and reached over there and saw that appellant was assaulting Junabai by an a...
Jhabar Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC356
S.L. Kochar, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 13th June, 1997, passed by learned Sessions Judge, West Nimar, Mandleshwar in Sessions Trial No. 178/1996, whereby convicted the appellant for commission of murder of his wife, sentenced to R.I. for life.2. In nutshell, the prosecution case was that deceased Ayodhyabai was married before 10-12 years according to their village custom called Natra. In that (evening sic.) the appellant was beating his wife, deceased Ayodhyabai, who was running here and there to save her. But nobody rescued her because of fear of the appellant. Thereafter he had given electric current by live electric wire on several parts of the body resulting into her death and thrown dead body in the morning at 4.00 a.m. of 26.9.1995 outside his house and after putting the lock outside the door of his house, he went away. The incident was witnessed by mother of the deceased Gendabai (P.W. 2) who was residing in adjacent to the house of the appell...
Girdhari and anr. Vs. Kantilal and Bros.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2003
Reported in: IV(2004)BC324
A.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellants/defendants have filed this appeal under Section 100, CPC against the judgment and decree dated 22.12.1987 in Civil Appeal No. 5-B/86 passed by the learned Ilnd Additional District Judge, Ratlam, partly allowing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 19.2.1986 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Class-I, Ratlam in Civil Suit No. 63-B/81.2. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is a registered partnership firm and the defendants, who are father and son and doing the business as Girdharilal Dungal took the loan of Rs. 1,500/- on 20.7.1978 and Rs. 300/- on 13.6.1978 and out of the total amount of Rs. 1,800/- the defendants have paid only Rs. 350/- on 15.6.1978 and as such the defendants be directed to pay remaining amount along with interest @ 2% p.m.3. The learned Appellate Court below has decreed the claim of the respondent/plaintiff and it was directed that the appellant will pay the interest @ 2% p.m. It is contended by the appell...
Sushila Sharma Vs. Chintaman Sharma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC156
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 31.7.1996 of dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion passed in Case No. 61/95 by the learned IXth Additional District Judge, Indore.2. The admitted facts of the case are that the marriage in between the appellant and the respondent was performed on 9.5.1974 according to Hindu Rites and Customs. In the year 1978 a son and in the year 1981 a daughter was born from the wedlock. That the appellant has lived with her husband in the matrimonial house for 17 years and from the year 1990 the appellant is living separately from her husband. It is also not in dispute that the respondent/petitioner was doing the work of distribution of films. It is a common ground that the appellant wife has lodged a report against the respondent/husband of treating her with cruelty for demand of dowry and the police has filed charge-sheet against the respondent ...
Babita Vs. Shyam Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC347
A.K. Awasthy, J.1. Appellant/petitioner has filed the First Appeal (No. 475/97) under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the judgment and decree dated 30.9.1997 in Civil Suit No. 15-A/97 passed by the learned IInd Additional District Judge, Dewas dismissing her petition filed for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.2. The appellant has filed another appeal (F.A. No. 476/97) under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the same judgment and decree dated 30.9.1997 in Civil Suit No. 16-A/97 passed by the same learned IInd Additional District Judge, Dewas, whereby the petition filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the H.M. Act was allowed.3. The petition filed by the appellant for divorce in Civil Suit No. 16-A/97 and the petition filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights in Civil Suit No. 15-A/97 were tried together and the learned Trial Court has recorded evidence of both the cases jointly. It is not in...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »