Madhya Pradesh Court October 2007 Judgments
Ayodhya Singh and ors. Vs. Smt. Kamlesh Singh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT489
K.K. Lahoti, J.1. This appeal was admitted on 18-2-1992 on the following substantial question of law:Whether in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding that the respondent-plaintiff had perfected his title over the suit land by remaining in possession for more than 12 years, is legal and justified?2. Learned Counsel for appellants assailed the judgment and decree passed by the Court below on following grounds:(i) That the plaintiff/respondent took inconsistent pleas in the case. On one hand plaintiff took plea that the land was exchanged by the father of plaintiff Ranchor Singh with Ram Pratap Singh, the father of appellant Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 and husband of appellant No. 4 and Smt. Manu Kunwar, and simultaneously the plaintiff pleaded adverse possession on the aforesaid land. Both the pleadings were inconsistent and conflicting and on the basis of these pleadings suit ought to have been dismissed. Reliance is placed to Apex Court judgment in Karnataka Board of wakf ...
Tag this Judgment!Harishankar Sharma Vs. Shrikrishan Dubey
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT223; 2008(1)MPLJ614
P.K. Jaiswal, J.1. Heard on admission.2. This appeal is directed against the eviction of the appellant on account of default of payment of rent under Section 12(1)(a) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act').3. The appellant took a disputed house on rent at the rate of Rs. 2300/- per month and executed rent note dated 1-10-1998 vide Exh. P-7. He failed to pay the rent from February, 1999 and therefore notice was issued vide Exh. P-2, dated 8-6-1999 by registered post. The appellant failed to pay the arrears of rent within a period of two months. The respondent filed a suit for ejectment on 13-8-1999 on the ground under Section 12(1)(a)(b) and (e) of the Act. The appellant in spite of receipt of summons failed to pay the rent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of summons and raised a dispute regarding the rate of rent and quantum of arrears of rent under Section 13(2) of the Act. The Trial Court vide order dated 28-8-2000 decided the dispute a...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Housing Board and anr. Vs. Sohanlal Chourasia and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ARBLR337(MP); 2008(2)MPHT101
ORDERAbhay M. Naik, J.1. Petitioner (M.P. Housing Board) issued a notice inviting tender for proposed construction of Commercial complex near Gurudwara, Victoria Hospital Jabalpur. Tender of respondent No. 1 was accepted for civil work amounting to Rs. 21,10,352/-. An agreement, as contained in Annexure P-1 was duly executed between the parties on 10-2-2005. Work order dated 13-5-2005 was duly issued in favour of the petitioner requiring him to complete the work within six months. There arose some dispute and consequently, the petitioner intimated the respondent to stop work vide its letter dated 17-8-2005. Respondent No. 1 issued a notice dated 12-9-2005 (Annexure P-2) under Clause 29 of the agreement with a request to refer the matter to the Arbitration of Additional Housing Commissioner. Again reminder-cum-notice dated 16-1-2006 (Annexure P-3) was issued by the respondent. Thereafter, another letter dated 1-4-2006 (Annexure P-4) was issued by the respondent that since the authority ...
Tag this Judgment!Kamlesh Gour and Rajju @ Shamim Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)MPHT22
A.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The two appeals have been filed under Section 2 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 18247/2006 and W.P. No. 7392/2007 on 27-8-2007.2. The appellant in W.A. No. 1428/2007 was convicted under Section 302/149, IPC and sentenced to RI for life in Sessions Trial No. 203 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore on 1-1 -2005. After completion of 2 years and two months and 20 days of imprisonment, the appellant filed an application for parole but the Collector, Sehore by order dated 21-8-2006 rejected the application. Aggrieved, the appellant filed W.P. No. 18247/2006 against the order of rejection of his application for parole, but by the impugned order dated 27-8-2007 the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition after holding that the reasons assigned in the impugned order rejecting the application for parole were good reasons.3. The appellant in ...
Tag this Judgment!Ayyub Ali Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2216
S.L. Kochar, J.1. The appellant has filed this appeal, challenging his conviction Under Section 498-A of the IPC, sentence to undergo RI for three years with fine of Rs. 5,000/-; in default whereof to undergo RI for six months, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaora in ST No. 181/1990, judgment dated 1st October 1994.2. Prosecution case in short as put forth before the trial Court is that on 6-10-1989 at about 7.45 p.m. wife of the appellant Jubeda committed suicide in his residential house situated in Jaora because the appellant was intentionally harassing her and ill-treating her by demand of dowry, she was also beaten. Because of demand of dowry, ill-treatment, harassment and beating, the wife of the appellant Jubeda committed suicide by consuming some poisonous substance.3. The matter was reported from Civil Hospital, Jaora to police by Dr. Shrivastava through report (Ex. P. 1). SHO Laxmansingh Chouhan (P.W. 7) registered inquest No. 15/1989 and started enquiry. In enquiry, ...
Tag this Judgment!Man Mohan Sadani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: [2008]304ITR52(MP)
1. Shri G.N. Purohit, learned senior counsel with Shri A. Oswal learned Counsel for the appellant.2. The appellants has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the order dated July 1, 2005, in I.T.A. No. 55(JAB)/2002 and I.T.A. No. 62 (JAB) 2002 which relate to the assessment year 1997-98. The appeal was admitted for hearing on the following questions of law:(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the entire sales were liable to be assessed as income even when the purchases were recorded in the books of account?(ii) Whether the learned Tribunal is legally correct in not deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,000 on the facts of the case even after recording a finding that cash was brought from home but treating it covered by the addition of undisclosed sales?3. As far as the first substantial question of law is concerned, it is submitted by learned senior counsel for the appellant that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the imp...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Manju and anr. Vs. Ghanshyam and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: AIR2008MP168; 2008(1)MPHT54
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. This batch of appeals was listed for rectification of default, the same being, the affidavit that has been filed in support of the applicant for condonation of delay preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 in each case has been sworn to by the Oath Commissioner instead of Notary under the Notaries Act, 1952. Though the aforesaid matters were listed for rectification of the aforesaid singular default which has been pointed out by the Registry, Mr. A.M. Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel, Mr. P.C. Paliwal, Mr. Imtiyaz Hussain, Mr. Ashok Lalwani, Mr. Greeshm Jain, Mr. K.N. Fakaruddin, Mr. Ashish Shroti, Mr. Ashish Trivedi, Mr. N.S. Parmar, Mr. D.K. Sharma and Mr. Vipin Sharma, Advocates addressed this Court that the default pointed out by the Registry is absolutely erroneous as such a default does not emerge if the provisions engrafted in various enactments and rules framed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh from time to time are scrutinized in proper pe...
Tag this Judgment!Mahesh Chand and ors. Vs. Nishar Khan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)MPHT522; 2008(1)MPLJ503
ORDERP.K. Jaiswal, J.1. Applicants by Shri P.C. Chandil, Advocate.2. Heard on admission.3. This revision application has been filed against the order dated 25-9-2007 passed by Rent Controlling Authority in Case No. 09/03-04/90-7, whereby Rent Controlling Authority rejected the application filed by the applicant under Section 23-A of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') on the ground that land lady Kalawati died during the pendency of the proceedings on 26-2-2007 and, therefore, cause of action does not survives to her heirs.4. The application under Section 23-A of the Act was filed by Smt. Kalawati before Rent Controlling Authority. During the pendency of the application, she died on 26-2-2007. Thereafter, an application was filed for bringing her legal heirs on record. The said application was allowed and applicant who are legal heirs of Smt. Kalawati were impleaded before the Rent Controlling Authority. The Rent Controlling Authority by the impugned order ha...
Tag this Judgment!Shakuntali Kol Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)MPHT97
R.C. Mishra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 5-7- 2007 passed by the Special Judge [under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')], Sidhi in Special Case No. 259/2007, whereby the appellant stands convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default to suffer R.I. for one month. She was tried on the charge of being found in an illegal possession of 1 kg and 100 grams of Ganja that is cannabis/hemp within the meaning of Section 2(iii)(b) of the Act.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 11-2-2007 at about 4.20 p.m., a credible information was received at Kotwali Sidhi to the effect that the appellant was indulging in sale of ganja in her house only. Accordingly, Sub Inspector R.K. Dwivedi (P.W. 9) conducted a raid at the house of the appellant. The raiding party included woman Constable Saroj Rawat (P.W. 5). Af...
Tag this Judgment!Prahalad Singh Vs. Jammna Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)MPHT72
ORDERU.C. Maheshwari, J.1. This order shall decide the I.A. No. 3039/07, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC filed on behalf of the proposed respondents namely Bahadur Singh Lodhi and Ammir Singh Lodhi to implead them as party in this appeal.2. This appeal is preferred at the instance of the plaintiffs being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 4-5- 1991 passed in the C.O.S. 2-A/78 (Old No. 41-A/91) by the Third Additional District Judge, Sagar dismissing the suit seeking declaration and permanent injunction in respect of some agricultural land.3. During pendency of this appeal above mentioned I. A. is filed by the Counsel for the respondent No. 1 (a) to 1 (f) on behalf of the Bahadur Singh Lodhi and Ammir Singh Lodhi who acquired the right, title and the interest in the disputed property during pendency of this appeal from the deceased respondent No. 1 Jammna Bai in the year 1992.4. As per averment of it, each proposed respondents purchased the sepa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »