Madhya Pradesh Court June 2007 Judgments
Ashok Kumar Mishra Vs. Durgavati and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)MPHT334
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by owner aggrieved by an award dated 10-1-05 passed by IIIrd Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sidhi in Claim Case No. 28/04.2. On account of death of Prabhunath Singh in an accident dated 21-2-94, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,66,000 along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization.3. In this appeal filed by Shri Ashok Kumar Mishra, registered owner of the vehicle, the only submission raised by the appellant to assail the liability is that the vehicle was transferred to respondent No. 5 Dharmraj Singh as per sale letter (Exh. D-2), dated 4-12-93 whereas accident took place on 21-2-94, scooter was seized as per seizure memo (Exh. P-7) on 29-2-94 along with original sale letter (D-2). A consideration of Rs. 11,500 was paid, thereafter it was the duly of transferee to apply for getting his name registered, consequently, Shri Ashok Kumar Mishra, after having...
Tag this Judgment!Satyabhan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)MPHT508
A.P. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30-4-01 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, NDPS Act, Shivpuri, in Special Case No. 6/2000, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 8 read with Section 20(a)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'the NDPS Act, 1985') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation.2. In short, the story of the prosecution is that on 17-9-2000, ASI, Ranvir Singh (P.W. 13), who was posted at P.S. Kotwali, Shivpuri, in the afternoon got information from the informant about the illegal cultivation of Ganja plants at Village Chharenta. He went to village Chharenta alongwith the policy party and independent witnesses. Due to want of time search warrant could not be obtained. Notice for search was given to the appellant and in search nearly 45 plants of 'Ganja ' were se...
Tag this Judgment!Deo Kumar Vs. Kailash Chand and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)MPHT151; 2008(1)MPLJ123
Abhay M. Naik, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff/appellant against the dismissal of his suit for declaration and injunction by the Courts below in concurrent manner.2. Plaintiffs are real brothers and the defendants are also real brothers. Both the parties own adjacent houses. There is a single wall supporting the house which has been claimed by the plaintiff as a common one belonging to the parties to the suit. It has been pleaded that the dispute wall was in dilapidated condition, therefore, the same was reconstructed in the year 1955 by the ancestors of both the parties. It has been further pleaded that for more than last 20 years both the parties were keeping their possession over it as co-owners and it was being treated as a common wall without any hindrance or obstruction. On 12-8-1975, the defendants tried to forcibly occupy the entire disputed wall. A complaint was lodged on 13-8-1975 with the Police Kotwali, Sehore and S.D.M. Sehore. No action was taken on i...
Tag this Judgment!Chander Singh Chamar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4003; 2007(3)MPHT485
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 9-3-1998 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore Camp Ashata in Sessions Trial No. 77/1997 convicting the appellant under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment of life and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further RI of six months, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. In brief, the case of prosecution is that complainant-Durga Bai is the wife of appellant and got married to him 4-5 years prior to the date of incident. Jasoda Bai (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') is the mother of complainant-Durga Bai and used to go to the house of her daughter Durga Bai frequently. The appellant was having certain doubt about the character of his wife as well as of deceased. The appellant was insisting his wife not to go to the house of her mother.3. Two days earlier to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhushan Vs. Bala Prasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)MPHT338
ORDERS.C. Sinho, J. 1. Heard.2. This is a revision petition filed by original plaintiff (revisionist) against the order dated 25-7-2003 passed by Civil Judge, Class II, Maihar holding that the plaintiff's Civil Suit No. 50-A/03 stands withdrawn without liberty to file a fresh suit. In view of plaintiffs Interlocutory Application under Order 23 Rule 1(3) of CPC has been partly allowed. The original suit was filed by the plaintiff for declaration of the sale-deed dated 6-8-1994 as null and void and permanent injunction.3. Learned Advocate of the applicant has argued that learned Civil Judge should have allowed or disallowed his application. The result of this order would be that he is deprived of the justice for which he has filed a civil suit. The learned Counsel for the applicant has requested that he wants to further proceed with the Civil Suit No. 50-A/03 for declaration of the sale deed dated 6-8-1994 as null and void and inoperative.4. I have gone through the impugned order. Order ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ramrati Sharma and anr. Vs. Smt. Sheela Sharma and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)MPHT71; 2007(3)MPLJ589
S.A. Naqvi, J.1. Appellants have preferred this appeal aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree dated 22-4-1998 passed by First ADJ, Morena, in Civil Suit No. 18-A of 2001 whereby, the suit filed by appellants/plaintiffs for declaration and injunction pertaining to 1/3rd share of disputed property has been dismissed.2. Admitted facts are that the plaintiffs/appellants and defendant No. 1/respondent No. 1 are real sisters. They are daughters of late Kalika Prasad. Jodharam and Harpal were real brothers. Jagannath Prasad and Kalika Prasad were sons of Harpal. Defendant No. 2 is son of defendant No. 1.3. Case of plaintiffs/appellants in brief, is that in ward No. 18, Morena disputed house is situated. This house was purchased by Harpal. Harpal was in possession of disputed house. The disputed house is parental property of the plaintiffs and defendant No. 1 Jagannath was having one half share and Kalika Prasad was having one half share in disputed property. The share of Kalika Prasad ...
Tag this Judgment!Dalsingh Vs. Shantilal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ2780
N.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the amount awarded vide award dated 20.12.2006, passed by the M.A.C.T., Jhabua in Claim Case No. 98 of 2004, whereby a sum of Rs. 2,04,000, has been awarded, the present appeal has been filed.2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was aged 40 years at the time of accident. Appellant was agriculturist by profession. The left leg of the appellant was amputated below knee. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,04,000 breakup of which is as under:Permanent disability Rs. 1,44,000Medical expenses,special diet andexpenses incurred onattendants Rs. 50,000Pain and suffering Rs. 10,0003. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was hospitalised at Choithram Hospital from 8.7.2004 to 6.8.2004. It is submitted that income of the deceased was assessed on the basis of notional income at Rs. 15,000 per annum and permanent disability was assessed after applying multipli...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Naresh Vs. Malti Devi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ2057
Abhay Gohil, J.1. This appeal is filed by the owner of the vehicle but in compliance of provisions of Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, appellant has not deposited any statutory amount for filing the appeal. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that on 9.5.2007, he has deposited a sum of Rs. 25,000 but as per the requirement of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the amount is required to be deposited along with filing of the appeal. The first proviso of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act reads as under:Provided that no appeal by the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall be entertained by the High Court unless he has deposited with it twenty-five thousand rupees or fifty per cent of the amount so awarded, whichever is less, in the manner directed by the High Court:3. It is admitted fact that the appeal was filed on 13.2.2002 and was admitted on 19.2.2002 but at the time of admission, it was...
Tag this Judgment!Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Parishad Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)MPHT166
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. These three writ petitions relate to the selection procedure adopted by the Association of Private Dental and Medical Colleges, Madhya Pradesh for selection of candidates for admissions in Private Medical and Dental Colleges in the State of Madhya Pradesh.2. The petitioner in W.P. No. 3630 of 2007 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and claims to be working for advancement of justice to students and has filed this writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation. The petitioner has stated in the writ petition that after the Common Entrance Test conducted by the respondent Association of Private Dental and Medical Colleges, Madhya Pradesh (for short 'the Association') for admissions to Private Medical and Dental Colleges in the State of M.P. for the Academic Session 2006-2007, known as D-MAT 2006, the Association followed a procedure of counselling by individual colleges for the seats remaining vacant and there were a number of compl...
Tag this Judgment!Madhya Pradesh Grih Nirman Mandal Vs. Kamala Devi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC624
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a second appeal filed by the plaintiff under Section 100 of C.P. Code against the judgment/decree, dated 27.2.1992, passed by learned District Judge, Ujjain in First Civil Appeal No. 1 -B of 1991, No. 24-A of 1991 which in turn arises out of Civil Suit No. 102-B of 1988, decided by 3rd Civil Judge, Class I, Ujjain on 20.11.1990. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial questions of law:1. Whether the first appellate Court erred in not affording a reasonable opportunity to the appellant to meet the objections as to limitation or to move an application for condonation of delay? 2. Respondent (plaintiff) filed a suit against the respondents for recovery of Rs. 10,455/- before Civil Judge, Class II, out of which this second appeal arises. The suit was contested by the appellant. By judgment and decree, dated 20.11.1990, the learned trial Judge decreed the suit. The appellant i.e. defendant felt aggrieved, filed first appeal before th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »