Skip to content

Madhya Pradesh Court February 2006 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.

Feb 02 2006

Chandra Kumar Kankariya and ors. Vs. State of M.P.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Feb-02-2006

Reported in: 2006(3)MPLJ280

Rakesh Saksena, J.1. Appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment dated 22-11-1991 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ualaghat, in S.T. No. 32 of 1991 convicting the appellants under Sections 302/34 and 201 of IPC and sentencing them to imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for five years respectively. Appellant No. 1 Chandra Kumar has been further convicted under Section 404 of IPC and sentenced to R.I. for three years.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution story is that on 24-10-1990 at about 4.00 P.M. Girish Kumar Tiwari (deceased) had left his house on his Rajdoot Motorcycle No. CIJ-391. When he did not return till late in night, his wife Smt. Roopa Tiwari informed Girish's cousin Pramod Tiwari at about 10-11 o'clock in night. She informed him that Girish had told her that he was going to fetch money from Pragati Plastic Factory Bhatera. When Girish had gone from house, he had been wearing brown shirt, black terricot full-pant, a gold chain, two gold ri...


Feb 01 2006

Tejmal Vs. Rajesh

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Feb-01-2006

Reported in: AIR2006MP131; 2006(2)MPHT149

ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the Order dated 1-11-2004 passed by IInd ADJ, Indore, in Civil Suit No. 1-A/2003 whereby the objection of the petitioner that the document in question is not properly stamped was rejected, the present petition has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that the respondent filed a suit for specific performance against the petitioner alleging that on 15-12-1994 respondent entered into an agreement for purchasing the suit property from the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 1,55,000/- of which consideration has already been paid by the respondent. In the suit it was prayed that a decree for specific performance of contract be passed in favour of respondent. The suit was contested by the petitioner on various grounds including the ground that the document of which petitioner is placing reliance is not admissible in evidence. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties learned Court below framed the issues and fixed the case for recording the evidence. I...


Feb 01 2006

Mohd. Latif and anr. Vs. Rashid Khan and anr.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Feb-01-2006

Reported in: 2007ACJ1380; 2006(2)MPHT112

ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 11-10-2001 passed by Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Begamganj District Raisen in Claim Case No. 17/2000 by which an amount of Rs. 77,800/- alongwith 12% interest has been awarded in favour of the appellant.2. In this appeal appellant has challenged the quantum of the award and also the finding of the Tribunal in respect of contributory negligence of the deceased. The facts of the case are that on 26-8-2000 the deceased Mohd. Saleem was travelling in a bus from Bhopal to Sagar. This vehicle was driven by respondent Rashid Khan and was owned by M.P. State Transport Corporation, Depot Sagar, District Sagar. At about 10 P.M. when the bus reached Gairajganj in front of Sharma Hotel, the deceased Mohd. Saleem was to get down there and when driver slowed down the bus, Saleem alighted. When alighting from the bus he fell down resulting serious injuries in his waist, hips and on chest. Saleem was brought to the hospital where ...


Feb 01 2006

Digvijay Singh Bhandari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Feb-01-2006

Reported in: 2006(2)MPHT348

ORDERS.C. Vyas, J.1. Applicant has preferred this revision under Sections 397 and 401 of the Cr.PC feeling aggrieved by judgment passed by IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore, in Cr.A. No. 200/05 on 31-8-2005, whereby and wherein the order passed by JMFC in Cr.C. No. 139/05 on 17-2-2005 directing confiscation of jeep has been affirmed.2. Learned Counsel for the applicant Shri S.L. Jain submitted that applicant is the registered owner of jeep bearing No. MP-12C-2828. The said jeep has given by him to one Manish Yadav and was seized by police Depalpur on 15-2-2005. On the allegation of transporting 40 quarters of liquor by this Jeep, by one Manish. The said accused Manish was convicted on admission for commission of offence punishable under Section 34(1) (a) of the M.P. Excise Act. He has further submitted that the said Manish Yadav sentenced with imprisonment till arising of the Court and Fine of Rs. 2,000/-. At the time of passing the judgment of conviction against accused Manish or...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial