Madhya Pradesh Court December 2007 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.
Shakuntala Devi Vs. Land Acquisition Officer, Satna-rewa Railway Link ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)MPHT481; 2008(1)MPLJ645
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In the appeals preferred by the claimants awards dated 21st December, 2000, award dated 15-11-2000 and award dated 16-1-2001 are in question.2. Matter relates to acquisition of land by the Land Acquisition Officer, Satna Rewa (Railway Link Project, Tehsil Huzur, District Rewa), the compensation determined with respect to land situated at Village Kheri, Ramkui and Para Suharantola, etc. is in question. Land was acquired as per notification dated 20th May, 1985 issued under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(1) of Land Acquisition Act. Reference was sought by the owners for enhancement, of compensation amount with respect to land acquired under the aforesaid acquisition. Land situated at Village Kheri 8.774 hectare was acquired. Land Acquisition Officer as per award dated 26-5-87 determined the valuation at Rs. 44,632 per acre and Rs. 1,10,240 per hectare. The Reference Court has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,20,000 per hectare. In F.A. No. 363/01 LAO passed award o...
Anil Kumar JaIn Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT413
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission.The petitioner contested and succeeded in the election held in the year 2005 for the post of President Municipal Council Deori District Sagar. On 6-8-2007 out of total 15 Councillors 13 Councillors of the said Municipal Council submitted a proposal before the Collector, Sagar for recalling of the petitioner from his office as President of the Municipal Council. The Collector after satisfying himself and verifying that the three-fourth of the Councillors of the Municipal Council have signed the proposal of recall of the petitioner sent the said proposal on 8/9-8-2007 to the Slate Govt. for further action.2. Thereafter, before the third respondent State Election Commission could declare the election, two Councillors out of the said 13 Councillors submitted another affidavits before the Collector on 30-8-2007 and 31-8-2007 respectively stating therein that the earlier affidavits seeking...
Abhay Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1489
S.L. Kochar, J.1. The appellant has lodged his grievance by filing this appeal against the judgment dated 25-9-1998 passed by the learned Third Addl. Sessions Judge, Dhar in Sessions Trial No. 192/97 thereby convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer additional R.I. for one month with a further direction that on realization of the amount of fine, Rs. 1,000/- be paid to the wife of the deceased Narottam as compensation.2. The facts of the prosecution case in narrow compass are that on 7-5-1997 there was a verbal altercation between the deceased Narottam and appellant Abhay on the score of not accepting two rupee currency note by the appellant. The accused appellant brought A Gupti and dealt 4/5 blows to Narottam causing injuries on his hand, legs, abdomen and chest. On hearing the cry, Smt. Rekhabai and Madan reached over on the spot. On raising cry by S...
Dr. V.K. Verma Vs. Dawoodi Bohra Masjid Committee Thr. the Secretary
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT416
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. This second appeal has been filed at the instance of the defendant as the learned First Appellate Court has allowed the appeal of the plaintiff and decreed the suit by the impugned judgment and decree.2. No exhaustive statements of facts are necessary for the disposal of this appeal. Suffice it to say that the plaintiff filed an appeal before the learned First Appellate Court, which was barred by time and eventually an application to condone the delay was filed. The appeal was decided by the learned First Appellate Court without deciding the application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 (in short 'the Act').3. This second appeal was admitted on 8-2-02 on the following substantial question of law:(i) Has the decision of first appeal, which was beyond time, without condoning the delay, been without jurisdiction and non-est in view of Chhitu v. Mathuralal : AIR1981MP13 ?(ii) Has the First Appellate Court below erred in exempting the respondent Masji...
Manakchand Ruthia Vs. Rajendra Kumar Agrawal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)MPHT64
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. Heard learned Senior Counsel on the question of admission. This order shall also govern the disposal of the Writ Petition No. 16255/2003, Manakchand Ruthia v. Rajendra Kumar Agrawal and Anr.2. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 23-10-2007 passed by the Ist Additional District Judge, Sehore in Civil Suit No. 3-A/2006 by which the application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'CPC') by the first respondent seeking consolidation of Civil Suit No. 3-A/2006 and Civil Suit No. 20-A/2005 has been allowed, the petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.3. The petitioner/plaintiff filed a Civil Suit No. 20-A/2005 seeking relief of declaration and permanent injunction against the first respondent. As per the plaint averments first respondent (defendant No. 1) entered into an agreement of sale on 29-9-1998 with the petitioner (plaintiff) to purchase the land out of Survey No. 480 Chawni, Sehore. It...
In Re: Garima Automobiles P. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2007
Reported in: [2008]141CompCas13(MP); [2008]84SCL28(MP)
S. Samvatsar, J.1. This petition is filed on behalf of the five companies mentioned in the petition under Section 394 read with Rule 79 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, for sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation as per the scheme enclosed with the petition as annexure 3. As per the said scheme (annexure 3), Garima Automobiles P. Ltd., Kanwal Motors P. Ltd., Charan Leasing and Finance P. Ltd., and Nandalala Motors P. Ltd., after amalgamated with the transferee company M/s. Prem Motors P. Ltd., their assets are to be transferred to the transferee company. On an application filed on behalf of the aforesaid company for making a request for convening meetings of the shareholders and the creditors of the company, this Court appointed Smt. Nandita Dubey as chairperson, and Shri Anand V. Bhardwaj as an alternate chairperson and directed to convene meetings after issuing notices in accordance with the rules. Accordingly, different meetings of shareholders and the creditors of each of the f...
Shiv Babu Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT418
ORDERR.S. Jha, J.1. Heard Shri Sanjay Patel, learned Counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief.The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by orders dated 3-2-2007 and 29-10-2007 passed by the Competent Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively removing the petitioner from service on account of his conviction for offences under Sections 498A and 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for a period of ten years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-.2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that in view of Regulation 238, the impugned order of removal of the petitioner dated 3-2-2007 could not have been passed, as the appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction is pending before this Court and vide order dated 25-4-2007 the appellant has been granted bail. It is also submitted that the petitioner could only have been removed from service by hold...
Hastimal Vs. Jagdish and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ1577
A.M. Sapre and Manjusha P. Namjoshi, JJ.1. Heard on I.A. No. 9989 of 2007. This is an application made by the appellant-claimant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing this appeal filed by him under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 6.4.2005 passed by learned First Additional Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 278 of 2003. According to the appellant as also from the noting of the office, the delay in filing appeal is of 833 days. In other words, the appeal is filed beyond the period of limitation by 833 days. Notice of this application was issued to the respondents. They are duly served and represented.2. The facts in brief need to be mentioned to appreciate the issue involved in this appeal as also in the application under consideration.3. It is the case of appellant-claimant that he sustained injuries on 29.9.1998 while going on a scooter. It is this incident, which was made the basis by the a...
Raj Kishore Jha Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT353
ORDERAbhay M. Naik, J.1. Applicant/petitioner was initially appointed in the year 1991 on the post of Block Development Officer in the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Government of M.P. Certain complaints were received against the petitioner in the year 1995- 96. After due enquiry punishment of stoppage of one increment for two years with non-cumulative effect has been awarded to him by respondent No. 1 vide order dated 1-8-1997 marked as Annexure A-1. The appeal, preferred against the same, was dismissed by the Deputy Secretary of Panchayat and Rural Development Department vide order dated 17-12-1998 contained in Annexure A-2. In the meantime, D.P.C. was held to consider the promotion of Block Development Officers to the post of Additional Assistant Development Commissioner on 28-8-1998. Pursuant thereto the impugned promotion order vide Annexure A-4 was passed on 31-12-1998 promoting thereby certain juniors including respondent No. 4. Orders Annexures A-1 and A-2 were ...
Anil Gupta and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-01-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT447; 2008(1)MPLJ308
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. Petitioners have filed this Probono Publico Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. In the petition their contention is that the State of Madhya Pradesh have allotted thousands of acres of land to the respondent No. 12-Gwalior Sugar Company Limited, Dabra for running a sugar factory but the Directors and owners of the Company in a planned manner are converting the aforesaid land into commercial plots and they are selling it through the power of attorney and respondent Nos. 1 to 11, who are the officers of the State including the General Manager of Industries Department, Sub-Registrar and President, Nagar Palika Dabra in collusion have allowed respondent Nos. 12 & 13/Company to use it for commercial purposes and helping them in transferring the same land. The petitioners, who are public spirited citizens and are businessmen paying income tax have come to the Court to stop the sale of Government land illegally, contrary to the terms and con...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›