Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
S.N. Verma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: (2004)ILLJ560MP; 2003(3)MPHT514; 2003(4)MPLJ373
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 25-1-2002 (Annexure A-9) by which the application of the petitioner for payment of gratuity has been rejected and for a direction to the respondents to pay gratuity to him.2 It is not in dispute that the petitioner retired from the services of Janpad Panchayat, Cherlanji, District Balaghat on attaining age of superannuation of 58 years on 30-6-1996. The petitioner claimed gratuity but it has been rejected. He made several representations and even then it was not paid to him. In the judgment dated 27-6-1997 in Writ Petition No. 1743 of 1997 of this Court there are certain observations that a Janpad employee is entitled to gratuity but not the pension as per Madhya Pradesh Janpad Panchayat Employees (Qualifications, Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1976. This judgment is Janpad Panchayat Tatha Zila Panchayat Karamchari Sangh and Ors. v. State of M.P....
Miskan Bee and ors. Vs. Narmada Borewell and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC671; 2004ACJ846
Deepak Verma and S.K. Seth, JJ.1. Mr. Manish Jain, learned counsel for the appellants, none for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 though served and Mr. Anil Goel, learned counsel for respondent No. 3.2. With consent arguments heard. This appeal has been preferred for enhancement of compensation awarded by the M.A.C.T., Shajapur in Claim Case No. 103 of 2002.3. For the death of Makbul alias Kallu Khan, Claims Tribunal by the impugned award dated 28.9.2002 has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,97,500 to claimants-appellants. Appellant No. 1 is the widow, appellant Nos. 2 to 4 are the minor children and the appellant Nos. 5 and 6 are the parents of the deceased. At the time of the accident, the age of the deceased was only 26 years and he was working as a TV mechanic. It is alleged that the deceased used to earn Rs. 3,300 per month. After analysing the evidence, Tribunal came to the conclusion that the respondent No. 2 driver of the offending truck bearing registration No. TN 28-Y 8437, which was coming from ...
Dikcha Vs. Jamaluddin
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC366; 2005ACJ1054
Deepak Verma and S.K. Seth, JJ.1. Mr. H.S. Rajpal, the learned counsel for the appellant; none for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 though served and Mr. S.V. Dandwate, learned counsel for respondent No. 3.2. They are heard on I.A. No. 4490 of 2002. This application was filed for dispensing with filing of the vakalatnama. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that after filing of the application, he has filed the vakalatnama on behalf of the appellant, therefore, this application has been rendered infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of and stands closed.3. With consent arguments heard. This appeal for the enhancement has been filed by the appellant Dikcha, who met with a road accident on 12.1.1998. The learned Tribunal after analysing (he evidence on record has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,70,522 on all heads relating to the pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses. The Tribunal also found that respondent No. 2 was responsible for causing the accident on the Ujjain-Dewas State Highway on acco...
Chetram and ors. Vs. Mewaldas and Co. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: III(2003)ACC435
Deepak Verma, J.1. This appeal for enhancement has been preferred by the aged parents and minor children of the deceased who had died on 2.9.2000 in a road accident. The deceased was travelling as a bona fide passenger in the bus bearing registration No. MP-43/F-0011.2. At the time of accident, the bus was being driven by Poonamchand, who also died in the same accident. At the time of accident, the bus belonged to respondent No. 1 and was insured with respondent No. 2. The finding of the Tribunal, that deceased Poonamchand was responsible for causing the accident, is not assailed before us. Therefore, the same is confirmed.3. The only contention urged by learned Counsel for appellants and respondent No. 3 is, that amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is grossly on the lower side. At this stage, it is pertinent to point out that Tribunal had not awarded any amount of compensation to the respondent No. 3, who was claimant No. 1 before the Tribunal, on the ground, that after the...
Kunjan Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT370; 2003(4)MPLJ284
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition for quashing order dated 14-7-2000 (Annexure P-3) of respondent No. 3 Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Rahatgarh, District Sagar, by which the services of the petitioner have been terminated.2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Secretary in Gram Panchayat, Deori (Mothi), Tehsil and District Sagar on 28-11-1994. A show-cause notice was served on him on 5-6-2000. That is Annexure P-1. In this notice it was stated that the petitioner has not given information to the newly elected Sarpanch about the affairs of the Gram Panchayat and he has also not informed the Sarpanch regarding the amount which is in deposit in various accounts of the Panchayat. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply. A copy of the reply is Annexure P-2. In this reply he gave full details of the amount deposited in various accounts of the Gram Panchayat, and also the other information. Thereafter the services of the petitioner ha...
Randheer Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT432; 2003(4)MPLJ321
ORDER1. Preliminary objection is raised by the Counsel for the respondents that this petition is not maintainable. Admittedly, an application under Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act for initiating proceedings for contempt against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 was filed before the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal. While exercising powers under Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') the Tribunal has dismissed the application. Against the said dismissal, this petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. Counsel for the respondents has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of T. Sudhakar Prasad etc. v. Govt. of A.P. and Ors. [2001 (1) MPJR 1]. He invited attention to Para 17 of the judgment and submitted that such order is not amenable to jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. In Para 17 of the judgment, it is held that the Apex Court in the case of L. Chandra ...
Ramesh Singh and ors. Vs. Vaijanti Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT497; 2003(4)MPLJ162
ORDERUma Nath Singh, J.1. A judgment dated 6-9-2000 passed by learned 1st Additional District Judge, Morena, in Civil Appeal No. 70-A/96 setting aside the judgment and decree dated 10-9-97 passed by learned 1st Civil Judge, Class-I, Ambah and remanding the case to him for consideration afresh has been impugned in this Misc. Appeal.2. The plaintiff/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 being the daughters of Kalyan Singh (since dead) and the plaintiff No. 3 being his adopted son, feared alienation of property by Kalyan Singh due to his deteriorating health. Hence they filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against Kalyan Singh, Smt. Awadh Kunwar (the respondent No. 4) and the present appellants. The suit was rejected on the ground that the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 are not in possession of the land in question. They are married daughters of Kalyan Singh. Similarly, the plaintiff No. ,3 was not found to have been adopted by Kalyan Singh.3. Being aggrieved by rejection of the suit, the plai...
Smt. Renu and anr. Vs. Dilip Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT117
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a revision filed under Section 115 of CPC by the non-applicants against an order, dated 9-7-2001, passed by learned Xlth Additional District Judge, Indore, in Civil Suit No. 59-A of 2000. By impugned order, the Trial Court has allowed the application made by the respondent under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act of 1940 (since repealed). So the short question that arises for consideration in this revision is, whether learned Trial Judge was justified on his part in allowing the application made by the respondent under Section 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 Facts necessary for the disposal of the revision need to be taken note of to appreciate the issue involved and urged.2. As observed supra, the petitioners are non-applicants whereas the respondent is the applicant in the Trial Court.3. Petitioner is a widow of one late Sudhir Bhargava whereas petitioner No. 2 is her minor son (now major). Late Sudhir Bhargava owned agricultural land bearing khasr...
Chhogalal Vs. Smt. HusaIn Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT268
ORDER1. Having heard learned Counsel tor the parties and having perused record of the case, I am inclined to allow this revision and set aside the impugned order dated 28-3-2003, passed by IVth Additional District Judge, Dewas, in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2000, which in turn arises out of Civil Suit No. 47-A of 1998, decided by IIIrd Civil Judge, Class I, Dewas, on 30-6-1999. 2. This is a civil revision preferred by defendant against the judgment/decree passed by learned First Appellate Court, whereby her first appeal filed under Section 96 of CPC against the judgment/decree passed by the Trial Court was dismissed on the ground of limitation. In other words, the appeal preferred by the petitioner/defendant before the First Appellate Court was filed 45 days late and therefore, the appellant moved an application for condoning the delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act. It is this application, which was dismissed by the learned First Appellate Court holding that it docs not d...
Shyam Narayan Chouksey Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2003
Reported in: AIR2003MP233; 2004(3)MPLJ216
Dipak Misra, J.1. In the days of yore it was vocally pronounced with immense emphasis that a drum beat may travel to a maximum limit of four miles but the utterances made by one man, through men, is capable of reaching people who are thousand miles away. The medium of man's expression has no limitation. In the modern world the media has irrefragably earned the status of inevitable and indispensable fourth pillar. Freedom of speech and expression has gained immense significance and its utility, by no stretch of imagination, can ever be marginalised and its importance be reduced but, an unavoidable and significant one, there are certain limitations which are imposed by law within the permissible, reasonable or rational, acceptable and non-arbitrary limits. Cinema as a medium of expression and as a mode of entertainment has reached an enviable status in the scientific world. The Indian cinema has a different conception from its inception inasmuch as myths, historical events, poignant nove...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »