Madhya Pradesh Court February 2003 Judgments
Shriniwas Fertilisers Ltd. Vs. Khaitan Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: (2003)2CompLJ27(MP); [2003]46SCL302(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. This is company petition filed by the two companies known as Shriniwas Fertilisers Ltd. (for short, hereinafter called as SFL) as transferor company and Khaitan Chemicals and Fertiliser Ltd. (hereinafter called as KCFL) as transferee company. It is filed under Section 391 according sanction by this court for the scheme of amalgamation of SFL with KCFL (Exh. E). The amalgamation is sought essentially on the ground that both companies are functioning under the same (one) management and are engaged in the fertiliser base business. It is averred in the petition that with a view to reduce avoidable administrative expenses and to carry on the business more effectively and profitably under the umbrella of one company, the amalgamation is proposed. It is averred that in terms of proposed amalgamation, SFL will merge/amalgamate with KCFL.2. This court while deciding the earlier Company Petition No. 7 of 2002 filed by these two companies had directed convening of the meeti...
Tag this Judgment!Kowa Spinning Ltd. and ors. Vs. Debt Recovery Tribunal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: AIR2004MP1; I(2004)BC106; [2005]123CompCas677(MP); 2003(2)MPHT114; 2003(2)MPLJ161; [2003]45SCL63(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. In course of adjudication of proceedings in a Court of Law sometimes vexed questions and complex situations do emerge which demand imperative penetration and intensive discernment to clear the maze and pave a luminous path through the labyrinthine so that the litigants precisely know their exact podium and become able to ventilate their grievances as permissible in law before the right forum without remaining in a state of uncertainty and in-definiteness. Certitude ushers in the quintessential virtues of law in an organized society and the absence of the same creates a shambolic situation which is not only unwarrantable but also law is at loath and averse to countenance the same. The cases at hand fresco a picture which not only creates a stir and an unusual ado to judicial discipline but also provokes and in a way accelerates the institutional syllogistic rethinking to have a deeper and greater probe into the arena of controversy. The spinal issue spiralled to ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramdas Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT301; 2003(3)MPLJ428; 2009AIRSCW604
Dipak Misra, J. 1. These two appeals preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') being interlinked and interconnected and having arisen out of a singular award dated 5-4-1994 passed in M.J.C. No. 64/85 by the learned Second Additional District Judge, Hoshangabad were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment. In First Appeal No. 212/1994 the claimant-land owner is the appellant who is assailing the award passed by the Reference Court and in the other appeal the State of Madhya Pradesh has called in question the defensibility of the same.2. The facts which are essential to be stated for the disposal of both the appeals are that the State Government issued a notification under Sections 4 and 17(1) of the Act on 26-9-75 for acquisition of land admeasuring 6.56 acres of land forming a part of Khasra Nos. 49, 52/1, 52/2, 84 and 88/2 situated in Village Rasulia, District Hoshangabad. The land of the claimant admeasur...
Tag this Judgment!Johnson M. Joseph Alias Shajoo Vs. Smt. Aneeta Jhonson
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: AIR2003MP271; 2003(2)MPLJ48
S.P. Khare, J. 1. This is an appeal by the husband under Section 55 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) against the judgment and decree by which his application under Section 23 of the Act for judicial separation has been rejected.2. It is not in dispute that plaintiff Jhonson M. Joseph and defendant Aneeta Johnson are Christians, they were married on 24-4-1995 at Bhopal; the plaintiff is a Ticket Examiner in Railway and the defendant has done M. Com. and is working in a private company; the plaintiff's parents are living in Brindawan Nagar, Bhopal and the defendant's parents are also living in Govindpura Bhopal; the defendant after the marriage lived with the plaintiff in the house of his parents for a brief period from 24-4-1995 to 8-6-1995; thereafter they lived in a rented house near Ashbagh Stadium at Bhopal at a monthly rent of Rs. 800/- from 8-6-1995 to 15-7-1995; the defendant became pregnant and then she went to the house of her parents o...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Kumar Vs. Smt. Chandrakripa
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT171; 2003(2)MPLJ468
S.P. Khare, J.1. These are two appeals under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') by the husband against the judgment and decree by which his application under Section 13 of the Act for divorce has been rejected and the application of the wife under Section 9 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights has been allowed.2. It is not in dispute that Chandra Kripa was an Advocate and practising at Sidhi. Umesh Kumar Soni was working as a Chemist in a Cement Factory at Manawar in District Dhar. They married on 7-12-1989. The distance between Sidhi and Manawar is about 1000 kilometers and it could be easily foreseen that it was bound to create trouble in the matrimonial life unless there was a deep understanding between the couple. The wife lived in Manawar at some intervals and the couple had two daughters. The wife did not leave her practice and continues to work as an Advcoate at Sidhi. From the various letters exchanged between the pa...
Tag this Judgment!Motilal (Deceased) Through L.R. Sushilabai Vs. Bank of India and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: II(2003)BC608
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This judgment shall also govern disposal of Bank of India v. Sushilabai and Anr., First Appeal No. 14 of 1984, arising out of the same judgment and decree dated 1.7.1983, passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 9-A/82. While the former appeal is against the award of interest on agriculture loan, the latter is for correcting calculation mistake in para 32 of the judgment.2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/Bank of India filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 21,398.81 alongwith interest and for future interest @ 13% p.a. The plaintiff also prayed for a decree for the recovery of the amount for the mortgaged land and hypothecated movable property. After trial, by the impugned judgment and decree the Trial Court decreed the suit for a sum of Rs. 15,180/- with corresponding costs and the future interest on Rs. 14,105.77 @ 11% p.a. till the date of recovery of the amount, against which both the parties have filed these appeals.3. I have heard the learned Counsel for th...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kamla Patel and anr. Vs. Firoz Khan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC839; 2004ACJ878; 2003(3)MPHT208
ORDERBhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandla, in Claim Case No. 35/99, dated 12-12-2000. 2. On 29-5-1998 at about 7.00 p.m., Ku. Vandana (11) was travelling by Bus No. MP 20-E/9631, owned by Smt. Rakhi Jaiswal, driven by Firoz Khan and insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Bus was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, as a result of which it hit stationary truck parked on left side of the road. As a result of this accident, head of the deceased was crushed when the bus crossed by the side of the truck. She died instantaneous death, since head was severed from the body. Ultimately, compensation of Rs. 3,30,000/- is claimed with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 3. The owner and driver of the bus submit that the accident took place due to negligence of the deceased, therefore, they are not responsible for this accident. The bus was being driven slowly and was under-control. It was insured ...
Tag this Judgment!Neetabai and ors. Vs. Balkishan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1107
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Balaghat, in the Claim Case No. 2 of 2001, dated 21.12.2001.2. Briefly stated, accident took place on 5.6.2000 at 3 p.m. in front of Ramdeo Tiles of Gondia Road, Navegaon, Balaghat, when a Commander jeep No. MP 22-H 8416 was going to Hatta with occupants therein and the truck No. MP 23-DA 2922 driven by Balkishan rashly and negligently hit the jeep. In this accident Pushpraj Munjare, Tundilal, Omkar Meshram and Roshanlal Pichhore died and Ashok Kumar Hanvate suffered injuries. The truck was insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd., owned by Devendra Singh A. Bhatiya and driven by Balkishan.3. The owner of jeep and the insurance company are also parties in this case. The respondents have denied the claim. They state, inter alia, that the claim is exaggerated. The jeep was being driven by Ashok, who did not possess valid driving licence. He was driving it rashly and negligently. It we...
Tag this Judgment!Tulsi Ram Vs. Mahesh Patel and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ767
Bhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sohagpur in Claim Case No. 35 of 1999 dated 20.7.2001.2. Accident took place on 3.12.1998 when the truck No. MP 05-F 0100 driven rashly and negligently hit jeep No. MP 05-F 3345 resulting in fracture of right elbow and fifth metacarpal bone. The claimant was driver in the jeep owned by Prembai, wife of Fundilal and insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., while Mahesh Patel is the driver of truck owned by Rajkumar and insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd. Compensation of Rs. 10,64,000 is claimed.3. Respondents have filed separate written statements in this case. It is alleged that the jeep was being driven by the driver under intoxication, therefore, he was liable for causing accident. Insurance company alleges that drivers of both the vehicles did not possess valid driving licence to drive the vehicles. Claim should have been initiated under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanumal Wadhwani and ors. Vs. Rajendra Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ129
Bhawani Singh, C.J.1. These four appeals, M.A. No. 18 of 1994 (Bhanumal Wadhwani v. Rajendra Singh); M.A. No. 20 of 1994 (Bhanumal Wadhwani v. Rajendra Singh); M.A. No. 21 of 1994 (Vipin Wadhwani v. Rajendra Singh) and M.A. No. 19 of 1994 (Yashwant Kumar Singh v. Rajendra Singh); are proposed to be decided by this order since they arise out of same accident and common award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sehore, in Claim Case Nos. 40, 43, 42 and 47 of 1989 respectively.2. Before proceeding to consider each claim for determination of compensation it is desirable to make mention of facts of the case.3. Briefly stated, accident took place on 13.10.1989 near village Bhilkhedi, Ashta-Sehore Road, when truck No. CIG 7071 driven rashly and negligently by Rajendra Singh, owned by Ram Veer Singh, insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd.; hit a Maruti car No. MOK 9417. As a result of this accident Anoop Wadhwani (son), Ekta Wadhwani (daughter-in-law) and Kamleshwar Singh (driver of Maruti c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »