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.
Municipal Council Nagda and anr. Vs. Grasim Industries Limited
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT547
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this petition shall also govern disposal of other connected writ petitions being W.P. Nos. 9549, 9550, 9551, 9552, 9553, 9555, 9556, 9557, 9558, 9559, 9560, 9561, 9562 and 9564 of 2003, as in all these writ petitions, common question is involved and they arise out of a common order.2. By filing this writ under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the revisionary order, dated 25-06-2003 (Annexure P-8), passed by Additional District Judge, Khachrod in Civil Revision No. 9 of 2000.3. Infact, in all these bunch of petitions, one common question is involved viz., whether appeal filed by the respondent under Section 139 of the M.P. Municipalities Act against the resolution, dated 15-09-1998, passed by petitioner before the Civil Judge, is maintainable? If the view of the learned Civil Judge is that appeal in question is not maintainable, the view of the Revisionary Court (ADJ) is to its contrary i.e. mainta...
Manoj Surgical Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-2003
Reported in: [2006]143STC101(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. By filing this writ, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks quashing of an order, dated September 30, 2002 (annexure P-1), passed by State (State Level Committee). Facts in brief are these.2. Petitioner is a public limited company registered as such under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of various surgical and medical instruments, namely, 'hypodermic disposable syringes and needles'. It is the case of petitioner that they purchase the raw needles in bulk from the market and then these raw needles are subjected to sterilisation process by use of chemicals in their processing plant. It is only after this process of sterilisation is undertaken by the petitioner in respect of those raw needles in their processing plant, they become a 'sterilised needle' and emerge as drug under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for being sold in open market as what is popula...
Devendra Singh Thakur Vs. Smt. Shantibai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT375; 2004(4)MPLJ327
ORDERS.P. Khare, J1. This is an appeal by the defendant No, 2 under Order 43 Rule 1 (r), CPC against the order by which an interim mandatory injunction has been issued against him to remove his belongings from the house in dispute and he has been restrained from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff No. 5 on this house.2. Badri, Onkar and Ramkishan were three brothers. Mathurabai was owner of a house on plot No. 3538 in Damoh. She bequeathed one third portion of this house to plaintiff No. 5 Rambharose and defendant No. 1 Narendra Kumar who are real brothers. They are sons of Onkar. Defendant No. 1 Narendra Kumar sold his share in the house by registered sale-deed dated 21-1-2003 to defendant No. 2 Devendra Singh Thakur who is a stranger to the family.3. The Trial Court recorded the prima facie findings that there was no partition between plaintiff No. 5 Rambharose and his brother defendant No. 1 Narendra Kumar in respect of the portion which was bequeathed to them by Mathur...
Anand Bairagi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT351
Kumar Rajaratnam, C.J.1. This is an appeal preferred by accused/appellant against judgment of conviction and sentence dated 18-9-2001 passed by Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Narsinghpur in Special Case No. 9 of 2001. The accused has been found guilty by the Special Judge, N.D.P.S., Narsinghpur under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act of 1985) for being found in possession of 50 grams of opium and has been sentenced to undergo 10 years' RI and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000.00, in default, to further undergo two years' RI. The cash amount of Rs. 20.00 seized from the accused has been directed to be confiscated.2. The accused was found in possession of 50 grams of opium. According to Shri Ajay Mishra, learned Deputy Advcoate General for State, it is valued approximately at Rs. 1000.00. Heard Shri Jagdish Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel for the accused and Shri Ajay Mishra, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State and perused the Engl...
Parmeshwar Deen Patel Vs. Snehlata and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT466; 2004(3)MPLJ322
ORDER1. The applicant has filed this application under Section 482, Cr.PC, for re-hearing of the revision petition on the ground that on 18-11-2002 the case was listed before another Bench, but on the same day, it was transferred to another Bench for hearing, this fact could not come to the notice of the applicant's Counsel so the Counsel could not appear before another Bench where the matter was relisted for hearing. The case was heard in the absence of the Counsel for the applicant and the revision was dismissed.2. The learned Counsel for the applicant, himself was Counsel in the aforesaid case. This fact is supported by an affidavit of Shri J.L. Soni, Counsel, who has supported the contents of the application in which it is specifically mentioned that the fact of transfer of the case from one Bench to another Bench could not come to the notice of the Counsel.3. On notice of this application respondent appeared and contended that the rehearing of the case will amount to review of the...
Guddu Putra Alias Yogendra Singh Thakur Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT117
S.K. Pande, J.1. A.S.J., Jabalpur vide judgment dated 18-12-2001 in S.T. No. 669/2000 recording conviction under Sections 376(1), 506, 324, and 323, IPC sentenced the accused/appellant with R.I. of 10 years, one year, two years, six months respectively. In addition he has been directed to pay fine of Rs. 25,000/-, Rs. 1000/- respectively under Section 376(1) and 324, IPC and in default to suffer imprisonment for a further period of one year, one month respectively. Being aggrieved the accused/appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.PC.2. The prosecution case in brief, is that accused/appellant is real uncle of prosecutrix Sujata (P.W. 6). He lived with the family consisting of Ambika Thakur, mother, Sujata and Sanyogita daughters. Sujata (P.W. 6) on 8-9-2000 lodged a report (Ex. P-10) at Kotwali Police Station, Jabalpur that at about 3 A.M., the accused/appellant molested her and on being resisted inflicted injuries by sword. Thereafter, the accused/appellant...
Ganesh Prasad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2003
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR14]; 2004(2)MPHT354
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In this petition, petitioner is aggrieved by an order of refusal to make reference on the ground of delay as per order (P-10) dated 29-8-2000 passed by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour.2. Petitioner was employed as casual labour in the year 1978 and was brought to the cadre of monthly rated casual labour. He was working in Central Railway. A service card was also issued to the petitioner. In the year 1984, while the petitioner was removed other contemporary gangmen were retained. Petitioner was again re-appointed at Harda. Petitioner fell ill and was admitted in the Railway Hospital, Burhanpur on 17-6-1995. During the period of his illness, petitioner was under treatment in the Railway Hospital, was shown to be absent and an S.F. 5 alleging misconduct of unauthorised absence was served on him. He has not been afforded any opportunity to submit reply to the S.F. 5 and on the assurance that no further action will be taken petitioner's signature on two bl...
B.B. Verma and Co. Vs. Clear Water Works Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-02-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT191; 2004(1)MPLJ465
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'new Act') for appointment ofArbitrator.2. It is not in dispute that there was an agreement dated 10-10-1990 between the applicant and the non-applicant. A copy of that agreement is Annexure P-1. There is arbitration clause in Para 9. The relevant sub-paras of Para 9 are as under :--''9.1. In case of any dispute arising between the client and CWL regarding the civil engineering portion of the work, meaning/interpretation of the clauses of the contract entered into between CWL and the client, the decision of the Arbitrator so appointed under the clauses o the said agreement shall also be binding on the second party in so for their involvement in the work/dispute is concerned and expenses incurred in the arbitration proceedings shall be to the account of second party.93. For claims beyond Rs. 50,000/- the disputes shall be referred by either party ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›