Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
Smt. Gomti Bai W/O Dhannalal Jain, Vs. Deokinandan JaIn S/O Lt. Shri S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ531
ORDERS.L. Jain, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 9.3.05 passed by the 10th ADJ, Jabalpur in C.S. No. 64-A/04 the petitioners/defendants No. 1, 2 and 5 filed this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (henceforth the 'Code'). 2. The facts which led to filing of this revision in nutshell are that the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit against the petitioners/defendants stating that ho is the owner of House No. 337/280 (new Nos. 42,43 and 44) situated at Lordganj, Jabalpur. His maternal grand mother, namely, Smt. Rani Bahu purchased the aforesaid house in the name of her grand son Dhannalal Jain who is real elder brother of plaintiff, by a registered sale deed dated 7.11.1915, At the time of purchase of the house, the age of Dhannalal was only 10 months. The entire consideration was paid by Smt. Rani Bahu. Thus, Smt. Rani Bahu was the sole and real owner of the house. The sale deed In favour of Dhannalal was nominal. Rani Bahu continued to remain In possession of...
Arun Kumar Mody and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPHT380; 2006(2)MPLJ430
ORDERS.S. Jha, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 482, Cr.PC by the petitioners for quashing the charge against them.2. Petitioners contended that charges for the offences under Section 418 read with Section 120B, IPC have been framed against them on 7-8-2002. It is contended by the Counsel for the petitioners that allegation about commission of offence relates to the period between 20-10-1994 to 28-10-1994 when the petitioners were holding the post of Director in the company known as 'Milk Food Limited Ads Bikaner'. He submitted that the Court had no jurisdiction to take cognizance after expiry of period of limitation prescribed under Section 468, Cr.PC.3. It is alleged that the petitioners alongwith co-accused have caused loss to the Dugdh Sangh, Gwalior.4. Section 468, Cr.PC lays down that no Court shall take cognizance for the offence beyond the period of punishment where maximum sentence is three years. Commencement of period of limitation is provided under Section 469, Cr....
Charan Lal S/O Jhawal Vs. Western Coalfield Limited Through Its Chief ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ85
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J. 1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking the following reliefs: '(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ or direction against the respondents to submit the entire service records of the petitioner from the possession of the respondents for its kind perusal. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in nature of mandamus directing to respondents to rectify or modify the date of birth of petitioner 20/10/1953. (iii) That, this Hon'ble Court be also pleased to issue a writ to respondents in nature quo warrantor as on which basis, the respondents have mentioned the date of birth of the petitioner as 1.7.1950. (iv) That, the respondents may kindly be directed to not retire/superannuated, to the petitioner unless the attain actual date of superannuation on the basis of actual date of birth 20.10.1953.2. Preliminary objection has been raised by Shri Anoo...
Haji Mohd. Islam and anr. Vs. Asgar Ali and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: AIR2007MP157; 2006(3)MPLJ334
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In invocation of the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have called in question the penetrability of the order passed in Civil Suit No. 27-A/04 by the learned Civil Judge-II, Jabalpur whereby he has rejected the application preferred under Section 65 of the Evidence Act by the petitioners.2. The facts in a nutshell are that the respondents initiated a civil action seeking ejectment of the petitioners from the suit house on the grounds arrears of rent, subletting and bonafide need for non-residential purpose under Section 12(a), (b) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act. It is the case of the respondents before the Court below that they are the landlord of building No. 662 situated at Kotwali Ward, Jabalpur and the petitioner No. 1 is the tenant of the building as per agreement dated 16-3-1976 executed between the respondent No. 1 and the petitioner No. 1. The accommodation that was let out was ...
Sukhbeer Kaur and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC433; 2008ACJ1094
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award, dated 12th April, 2005, passed by learned 3rd Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Facts of the case are these:On 15th December, 2002, Sukhdev, aged 48 years and owner of tanker bearing No. MP-09-KA-4413 died while driving his own vehicle. Along with him, the cleaner of tanker traveling with Sukhdev also died. It is this incident which gave rise to filing of claim petition by his legal representatives out of which this appeal arises seeking compensation for his death. According to claimants, tanker in question was insured with respondent No. 1 (Insurance Company) and hence, they being the insurer were liable to pay compensation for his death. The respondent contested the case. Parties adduced the evidence. By impugned award, the Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim petition essentially on the ground that since deceased himself was driving his own vehicle ...
indore Development Authority Engineers' Association Vs. State of Madhy ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ45
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the provisions of Sub-sections (2-A), (2-B), (2-C), (2-D) and Sub-section (6) of Section 76-B of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 as amended by Act 11 of 1991 as ultra vires and unconstitutional.2. The relevant facts are that the petitioner is an Association of officers/employees of Indore Development Authority. The Indore Development Authority was constituted under Section 38 of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (for short 'the Act'). The Indore Development Authority appointed various officers and servants under Section 47 of the Act. The Act was amended by Act No. 4 of 1983 introducing a new Chapter IX-A on Development Authorities Services. Section 76-B in the said new Chapter IX-A provided for constitution of Development Authorities Service. The Government of Madhya Pradesh in exercise of its powers under Sub-section (2) of Section 76-B of the Act introdu...
Deewan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPHT371; 2006(2)MPLJ586
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of Criminal Appeal Nos. 1/98 and 55/99.2. Cri. Appeal No. 1/98 has been filed by appellant Deewan Singh, challenging his conviction under Section 324, IPC and sentence of one and half years R.I. with fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in Cri. Appeal No. 55/99 the State has challenged acquittal of the respondents including that of Deewan Singh under Sections 147, 148, 294, 341, 307 read with Section 148, IPC.2. In Sessions Trial No. 168/95 the respondents of State Appeal were tried for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294, 341 and 307/149. The Trial Court convicted only respondent Deewan Singh under Section 324 and sentenced to one and half years R.I. with fine of Rs. 3,000/-, but acquitted rest of the respondents from the charges. Against which, both have filed the aforesaid appeals.3. As per prosecution story on 30-3-96 at about 4.30 p.m. on a public road, which is known as Moola Road, complainant Gopal was going to sell Kulfi on a ha...
Raghuraj Singh and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPLJ425
ORDERManjusha Namjoshi, J.1. This Criminal Revision has been preferred by applicants/accused under Section 397 read with Section 401(1), Cr.PC.2. The accused persons were charged and convicted under Section 325/34, IPC by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hata, District Damoh in Criminal Case No. 1057/2000 (Parties being State v. Raghurajsingh and Ors. three) on 24-3-2005 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Trial Court accused preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court and in turn the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh in Criminal Case No. 45/05 parties being Raghurajsingh and Ors. three v. State, partly allowed the appeal maintaining the conviction but modifying the sentence part, ordered that each accused shall pay fine of Rs. 7000/- and in default each one will undergo rigorous imprisonment for a ...
Manmohan Kaul Vs. Hindustan Copper Limited and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)MPHT364
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic and to secure to all its citizens;Justice, social, economic and political;Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;Equality of status and of opportunity;and to promote among them allFraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;is the preamble of our prestigious Constitution which govern the entire country, the citizens and also their fundamental rights. Right to livelihood and life is an integral facet of right to life. Nobody could question and deny the enjoyment of this fundamental right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Article 12 of the Constitution of India defines the State which reads thus:Definition:- In this part, unless the context otherwise requires, 'the State' includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the Leg...
Dr. Banshpati Prasad Vs. Principal, Government Ayurvedic College and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)MPLJ358
Arun Mishra, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for the relief for quashment of the order (P/14) cancelling the admission in MD Ayurvedic on the ground that he has not passed Pre-Ayurvedic examination in first attempt. Petitioner has also prayed for other consequential reliefs.2. It is averred in the petition that petitioner was admitted in Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) course in the year 1984 and passed it without any break in first attempt in the year 1988. This a five years degree course as apparent from mark-sheets (P/1 to P/5). The course is prescribed by the Central Council of Indian Medicine as per the provision laid down in Bhartiya Chikitsa Kendriya Parishad Adhiniyam, 1970. Graduation course prescribed for BAMS is of five years commencing from 1st year and ending in final BAMS as prescribed by the Central Council of Indian Medicine, the petitioner has undergone that course. Pre-Ayurvedic course is not a part of graduation course of BAMS, but...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »