Madhya Pradesh Court February 2004 Judgments
Mill Mazdoor Sangh Vs. Binod Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)2CompLJ142(MP); [2004]55SCL52(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. Report of Official Liquidator, dated 20 February, 2003, perused for the purpose of granting permission to employ additional staff for looking after various matters pertaining to this company. This company is in the process of being wound up. Indeed, there are directions from their Lordships of the Supreme Court in one pending case for its expeditious disposal by this court; pursuant thereto, proceedings for its expeditious disposal are being taken up on priority basis. Substantial steps have been taken by this court by passing several orders towards disposal of the properties, stock in trade, plant, machinery, buildings, etc. Dues have been recovered and sale price has also been collected by the Official Liquidator by way of sale of the aforesaid properties. Large number of claims (about 3,500) of the workers working in the company are under investigation, in addition to other claims of the creditors secured as well as unsecured creditors.2. The Official Liquidato...
Tag this Judgment!Hind Syntex Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)IIILLJ58MP
A.M. Sapre, J. 1. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused record of the case, I find no merit in the writ.2. In substance, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order, dated December 27, 2003 (Annexure-P-3), passed by the Labour Commissioner whereby the application made by the petitioner under Section 25M of the Industrial Disputes Act praying permission to effect lay off in their unit was rejected. It is not in dispute that consequent upon the rejection, the petitioner has invoked the provisions of Section 25M(7) ibid and has accordingly, applied to Commissioner on January 2, 2004 (Annexure-P-4) for making a reference to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute.3. In a case of this nature where the Act provides for a remedy to seek adjudication of the issue relating to legality and validity of the lay off by means of reference by the Industrial Tribunal and the same having been taken recourse of by the petitioner then in my considered view no ...
Tag this Judgment!indersingh and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT198; 2004(3)MPLJ97
S.L. Kochar, J.1. All these three appeals are filed against the same judgment, hence taken up together and disposed of by this common judgment. Appellant Indersingh has filed two appeals against his conviction being Criminal Appeal Nos. 207/1996 and 255/1996.2. Being dissatisfied with the judgment dated 29th February, 1996 rendered in Sessions Trial No. 175/1995 by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam, whereby he convicted the appellants for the offence under Sections 302/149, 307/149, sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default whereof to undergo R.I. for two years, seven years, R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default whereof to undergo one year R.I. respectively and also convicted appellants Kalabai, Ramchandra, Bagdiram and Gopal under Section 148, IPC and sentenced them to undergo one year R.I. and appellants Bherulal, Indersingh and Badrilal under Section 147, IPC and each of them are sentenced to undergo six months R.I., the appella...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Saraswati Pandey Vs. Secretary, State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)MPHT261
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1.In certain situations in life a person does not envision the disturbing future which ultimately finds its roots embedded in the incidents of the past and struggle begins in the future canvass, sometimes a smooth one and some other time creating a rough weather trying to chain and tie a person like an octopus disallowing the person to get away, even an inch, from the bizarre episode of the past. To elaborate : the past haunts like a ghost but there is no magic or any kind of sorcery to emerge like a resplendent light to enlighten the already blinded future. Thus, the conduct becomes a governing and pivotal fulcrum.2. Filtering unnecessary details the facts which are necessitous to be stated are thus :--The petitioner was the wife of late Ram Khilawan Pandey who was working in the Government Engineering College, Rewa. Said Ram Khilawan met with an accident in the month of June, 1997 and breathed his last. After his death the petitioner claiming to be his widow appro...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Gujari Bai and ors. Vs. Bunkar Sahkari Samiti Limited and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT216; 2004(3)MPLJ9
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. The petitioners aggrieved by the order passed by the District Judge, Chhindwara (Annexure A-1), dated 18th March, 1994 by which the order passed by the Civil Judge Class-I, Saunsar, dated 13-11-1992 (Annexure A-2) was reversed, have filed this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. Facts of the case are that the petitioners' predecessor Dharam Das filed a dispute before the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Chhindwara for recovery of Rs. 9,131. This dispute was decided as case No. 230/69 on 16-3-1969 and decree of the aforesaid amount along with 6 per cent interest per annum with cost was passed in favour of Dharam Das. Thereafter, Dharam Das filed execution proceedings before the Civil Judge Class I, Saunsar under Section 85-A of M.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act' for brevity). In the execution proceedings, judgment-debtor moved an application that the award passed by the Assistant Registrar, ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Deochand Bhura Vs. Purushottam Das Tandon and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT144; 2004(2)MPLJ148
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is plaintiff's appeal under Section 96, CPC against the judgment and decree by which his suit for specific performance of contract has been dismissed.2. It is not in dispute that defendant No. 1 Purushottam Das Tandon was owner of plot No. 134, Manmohannagar, Cherital Ward, Jabalpur. He agreed to sell this plot to the plaintiff by Ikrarnama dated 26-10-1983 executed by deceased defendant No. 6 Radhika Prasad Verma as his agent. An amount of Rs. 10,000/- was paid by the plaintiff to the vendor on the date of execution of the agreement as advance. The sale-deed was to be executed by the vendor on receipt of the remaining amount of consideration within three months. Hubbilal was in actual possession of this plot. He filed Civil Suit No. 374-A of 1983 against the plaintiff and Radhika Prasad Verma. On 2-12-1983 it was recorded in the order- sheet of that civil suit that the plot would not be sold to the plaintiff till the time of filing the written statement. Again on...
Tag this Judgment!Shivshankar Warde and ors. Vs. Dewas-shajapur Kshetriya GramIn Bank an ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ437MP; 2004(3)MPLJ381
1. This intra-Court Appeal under Clause X of Letters Patent has been preferred by some of unsuccessful petitioners of Writ Petition No. 799/2000, decided by learned single Judge on June 25, 2001. Writ Petition was filed by as many as ten petitioners. But, this appeal has been preferred only by five aggrieved petitioners, remaining five were joined as respondents. During pendency of appeal, appellant No. 3-Rakesh Patidar sought permission to withdraw from this appeal, thus, his name was directed to be deleted. Appellant No. 5-Sudhir Wakde died during pendency of this appeal, thus, his name was deleted. Appellants had approached writ Court by filing a Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging Order of Promotion issued by respondent No. 1-Dewas Shajapur Kshetriya Gramin Bank on March 16, 2000. Appellants have been working on the post of Junior Management Grade-I and were to be promoted to the post of Middle Management Grade-II.2. Since they were denied p...
Tag this Judgment!MoinuddIn Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT47
ORDER1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against order dated 4-2-2003, passed by M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Indore Bench, in petitioner's O.A. No. 2117/1989.2. When this matter had come up for admission before us, we would have declined admission looking to grave misconduct said to have been committed by petitioner which was found proved in the departmental enquiry held against petitioner, but at that time, learned Counsel for petitioner submitted that for absence of seventy four days by petitioner, punishment of removal from service should prick judicial conscious and, therefore, minor punishment be awarded to petitioner. It was further submitted that in case petition is allowed, petitioner would be ready and willing to forego all monetary and consequential benefits arising out of reinstatement in service. Only after this submission having been made by learned Counsel for petitioner, we deemed it proper to issue notices to respondents. Respond...
Tag this Judgment!Manish Kumar Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)MPHT337; 2004(4)MPLJ20
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has assailed the order (P-5) of termination of his services passed by the Secretary, M.P. State Legal Services Authority.2. Briefly stated the facts indicate that petitioner was appointed as Asstt. Grade III on compassionate basis. Appointment order (P-l) was passed on 28-7-^99. Petitioner worked with dedication, devotion and honesty and no adverse remark was communicated. On 14-5-2001 respondent No. 3, District Legal Services Authority, Raigarh, passed an order (P-2) and relieved the petitioner from Raigarh and directed him to report the Secretary, M.P. State Legal Services Authority, Jabalpur. Petitioner reported to the Secretary on 19-5-2001, no posting was given so that he could get the salary. An application (P-4) was submitted on 21-6-2001, An order (P-5) terminating his services was passed on 21-8-2001. No reason has been mentioned to terminate the Service. Neither inquiry has been held nor any show-cause notice was iss...
Tag this Judgment!Amir and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3686; 2005(1)MPHT411; 2004(3)MPLJ140
S.L. Kochar, J.1. Being dissatisfied with the judgment dated 14-2-2003 rendered in Special Sessions Trial No. 29/2002 by the learned Special Sessions Judge, Ratlam, whereby he convicted appellants for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default whereof to undergo R.I. for 5 years. Learned Judge has also convicted appellant No. 1 Amir for the offence punishable under Section 307, IPC and appellant No. 2 Anis for the offence punishable under Section 307/34, IPC and sentenced them to suffer rigourous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default whereof to undergo RI for 5 years respectively. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. In brief the prosecution case before the trial Court was that in the night of 7-7-2002 at 10.30 pm....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »