Madhya Pradesh Court September 2003 Judgments
Kogi Ram Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT292
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mandla, in Sessions Trial No. 9/1999, convicting the appellant under Section 376, IPC and directed him to suffer R.I. of seven years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default three months further R.I., the appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. No exhaustive statement of facts are necessary, for the disposal of this appeal, suffice it to say that on 20-10-1998, at five in the evening the prosecutrix went to store the water from a small spring (Jhiria), which is situated at the outer skirt of the village and when she was storing the water at that juncture accused/appellant came and hugged her thereafter he threw her on the ground. It is said that thereafter the prosecutrix hurled the abuses to him, but the accused did not allow her to escape, and despite she resisted, he undressed her and thereafter committed r...
Tag this Judgment!Darbari Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT373; 2004(1)MPLJ580
Arun Mishra, J.1. Appellant is aggrieved by his conviction and sentence imposed for commission of the offence under Section 376(1), IPC he has been sentenced to undergo seven years RI by Addl. Sessions Judge, Dindori in S.T. No. 58/97.2. The allegation against the accused/appellant is of commission of rape over a dumb girl aged 18 years namely Parwatibai on 26-2-97. Parwatibai and accused Darbari Singh are neighbours. Prosecutrix was not married still gave birth to one daughter. According to the prosecution case Parwatibai is dumb and her marriage has not been performed. Accused Darbari Singh was having no issue though he was married. At the time of incident Parwatibai's parents had gone to their field for harvesting. Accused taking advantage, wanted to perform sexual intercourse and assured Parwatibai of performance of marriage and forcibly committed sexual intercourse and thereafter continued to perform sexual intercourse. Parwatibai got pregnant after 3 months. Parents of the prosec...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Prasad Kori Vs. M.P. State Road Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT385; 2004(2)MPLJ70
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 28-6-1997 (Annexure P-1) of the Labour Court and order dated 3-2-2000 (Annexure P-2) of the Industrial Court.2. The petitioner was employed as a conductor in Central Provinces Transport Services in the year 1953, This undertaking was taken over by the State of Madhya Pradesh in 1955 but the conditions of his service were protected. After formation of the M.P. State Road Transport Corporation, the services of the petitioner were transferred to this Corporation. In the CPTS the retirement age of the employees was 60 years. The petitioner was retired on 2-8-1986 on attaining the age of 58 years. The petitioner's case is that he was entitled to continue in service upto the age of 60 years. The Labour Court and the Industrial Court accepted his plea relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in S.P. Dubey v. M.P. State Road Transport Corporation, 1991 MPLJ 1. However, th...
Tag this Judgment!Sutinder Pal Singh Arora and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar JaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ782; 2003(4)MPHT383; 2004(2)MPLJ33
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of First Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Seoni, in Claim Case No. 110/92, dated 29-2-2000.2. Briefly stated, the accident took place on 11-6-91 when Truck No. CPV 4975 driven rashly and negligently by Kalyansingh hit Car No. MH-31-G-0560 in which Smt. Amarjeet Kaur was going from Nagpur to Jabalpur alongwith her son Raunak, daughters Ritika and Ruchika, resulting in her death. The claimants are husband and daughter of Smt. Amarjeet Kaur. Compensation of Rs. 3,12,000/- has been awarded with interest at the rate of 4% per annum.3. The claimants being dissatisfied with this award, have challenged the same through this appeal. The sole question for determination in this case is whether the claimants have been awarded just compensation. Shri Akshay Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel for the appellants, submitted that as the award passed by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate looking to the status and income of the deceased, the sam...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Naved and ors. Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT16
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal was originally preferred by Mohd. Sayed and Smt. Shamina Sultan. Both of them are dead and the present appellants are their legal representatives. Earlier this appeal was finally heard on 7-10-2002, and was decided on 9-l-2003.During the course of hearing, when this appeal was heard earlier, neither any application was filed by the present appellants for their substitution, nor it was brought in our notice that both the appellants were dead, when the appeal was heard. After the pronouncement of the judgment the present appellants by filing an application under Order 22 Rules 3 and 9of the Code of Civil Procedure, sought permission for their substitution. The said application was registered as M.C.C. No. 262/2003 and was decided and allowed by this Bench on 21-7-2003. In this manner the present appellants are brought on record in the appeal and as directed in the order dated 21-7-2003, in M.C.C. No. 262/2003, this appeal was re-listed for hearing.2. Mr...
Tag this Judgment!Jugal Kishore and anr. Vs. Ramlesh Devi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC353; 2004ACJ297; 2003(4)MPHT574; 2003(4)MPLJ546
ORDERS.S. Jha, J. 1. Both these appeals are referred to the Larger Bench by the Division Bench to determine the question :--Whether insurance company can be held liable in the case of death or bodily injuries caused in a motor accident involving a tractor which was insured only for agricultural purpose and the sitting capacity was also shown to be one only but used for different purpose at the time of the accident ?2. Opposite view has been taken by two Division Benches which resulted into the reference before this Bench, In the case of Baburam v. Om Prakash and Ors. 2000(1) M.P.H.T. 7 (NOC) - 2000 ACJ 390, it is held that in such circumstances, insurance company can not be held liable to pay the compensation jointly and severally with the insurer. Similar view was taken by this Court in the case of Sukhanandan v. Oriental Insurance Co. and others, [1999 (1) TAC 24] and in the case of Ramji Lal and Ors. v. Omkar Lal and others, M.A. No. 86/92, decided on 7-1-2003. However, contrary vie...
Tag this Judgment!Brahan Dutt Shukla Vs. Ashok Leyland Finance
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ARBLR493(MP); 2003(4)MPHT564; 2004(1)MPLJ337
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 15th March, 2001 passed by the learned VIth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 5-A/2001.2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows:--The appellant filed a civil suit against the respondent for declaration and injunction praying for following reliefs :--'A. A decree be passed declaring that the arbitration proceeding be initiated by the defendant at Chennai is illegal and void and further a decree for permanent injunction be passed restraining the defendant taking any steps towards initiation of arbitration proceedings as mentioned in notice dated 16-12-2000.B. Any other relief which being and appropriate under the circumstances of the case be passed along with cost of the suit.'3. By way of interim relief the appellant filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying that the...
Tag this Judgment!Shubhkaran Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT168; 2004(1)MPLJ205
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. By this appeal the appellant is assailing the judgment dated 14-10-1991 passed in Sessions Trial No. 44/88, by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Sidhi, whereby he has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-. The Trial Court has however, acquitted the co-accused persons, namely, Chotelal, Pannalal and Chitanand.2. According to the prosecution, on 19-1-1988, at about 1.30 p.m. one Bhagwat Prasad while going towards Village Panikabandha along with Vijay Singh (P.W. 2), Gopal and Rama heard the sound of cutting of a tree from forest near Village Titaria. Bhagwat Prasad was a Forest Guard. When he went to the place from where the sound was coming, he saw appellant Shubhkaran and Chitanand cutting a tree by their axes. Bhagwat Prasad asked them not to cut the tree and insisted for handing over their axes to him. Both of them after initial protest handed over their axes to Bhagwat...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Employees' State Insurance and Ors. Vs. State of M.P. and Anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT344
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for to declare Rules 4.5 and 5.2 of Madhya Pradesh Medical and Dental Postgraduate Admission (In-Service) Rules, 2003, as ultra vires the Constitution of India and further they run counter to the decisions rendered by the Apex Court.2. The facts which are essential to be stated are that the petitioner No. 1, a registered Association of Insurance Medical Officers working under the Government of Madhya Pradesh, represented by its President. The petitioner Nos. 1-A and 2 are the doctors working as Insurance Medical Officers. It is putforth in the petition that the grievance agitated is both collective and individualistic. The petitioner No. 1-A passed MBBS Examination from Mahatma Gandhi Medical College, Indore, in the year 1991 and thereafter joined in service as Insurance Medical Officer/Assistant Surgeon under the Labour Department in ...
Tag this Judgment!Kirtan Prasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: 2005CriLJ69
S.L. Jain, J.1. Appellant Kirtan Prasad stands convicted for offence punishable under Section 302, IPC with sentence of imprisonment for life vide impugned judgment dated November 30, 1989 passed by Sessions Judge, Mandla, in Sessions Trial No. 29/88.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that deceased Parvat .Singh was the maternal uncle of appellant Kirtan, Mole Singh (PW- 2), Adhar Singh (PW-10), Mukesh Kumar (PW-11) are his father, uncle and cousin respectively, whereas, Junki Bai (PW-3) is his another cousin (Mouseri Bahin).3. On 17-6-88 at about 6 pm at village Barapani, deceased Parvat Singh, Jani Bai (PW-3) and Mole Singh (PW-2) were sitting in the courtyard of Mole Singh and were chitchatting on family matters. Deceased Parvat Singh as per his habit was speaking in loud voice. Appellant Kirtan Prasad felt that the deceased is quarrelling with his father Mole Singh, therefore, he brought an axe from the inner side of the house and dealt an axe blow on his neck. The deceased Parv...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »