Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Keshav Das Agrawal and ors. Vs. General Manager, Uco Bank and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: III(2008)BC360
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 27.2.2006 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, dismissing an application for review filed by the petitioner and thereafter rejecting the appeal itself filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal under Section 21 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, petitioner has filed this petition.2. Facts that have come on record indicate that being aggrieved by the judgment rendered by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in T.A. No. 875/94 and challenging the final judgment directing recovery of Rs. 54,88,852/- appeal under Section 21 of the Act was filed along with a application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and so also a application for waiver of pre-deposit amount. On 13.12.2005 vide order Annexure P/4 prayer for waiver of pre-deposit was considered and waiver to the extent of deposit 70% was allowed. Petitioner was directed to deposit 30% of the debt determined by the...
Medha Patkar Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ47; 2007(4)MPHT219
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J. 1. This is a Public Interest Litigation registered pursuant to a letter dated 26.7.2007 from District Jail, Indore, written by the petitioner on behalf of the people affected by the Sardar Sarovar Project who, while agitating from their demands for rehabilitation were arrested and detained in the Badwani and Indore Jails. 2. The petitioner has alleged that 26 women agitators and 1 child of seven years of age were brought from police custody of Badwani at 4 a.m. early morning on 26.7.2007 and about 200 men agitators and 10 children were also arrested along with them using immense police force. She has further stated that they were all arrested at around 6.00 p.m. on 25.7.2007 from the place of their agitation called Jamin Hak Satyagrah for giving land to adiwasis, farmers, fishermen, labourers as per the Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal (NWDT) award, the policy of the State Government of Madhya Pradesh and the orders passed by the Supreme Court. She has alleged tha...
B.B. Verma and anr. and S.C. Batra and anr. Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: AIR2008MP202; 2008(1)MPHT17
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. These are references made by the Division Bench by order dated 4-5-2007 passed in W.A. Nos. 292 of 2006, 316 of 2006, 320 of 2006 and 321 of 2006, by order dated 17-5-2006 passed in W.A. No. 314 of 2006 and by order dated 19-6-2006 passed in W.A. No. 319 of 2006. By the aforesaid orders, the Division Bench has referred to the Full Bench two Division Bench decisions in Ch. Chandra Shekhar v. State of M.P. and Ors. 2000 (3) M.P.H.T. 351 : 2002 (1) MPLJ 358 and Seth Mohanlal Hiralal v. State of M.P. and Anr. 2001 (5) M.P.H.T. 539 for reconsideration.2. The facts briefly are that the agreements of the appellants with the State Government in respect of some public works were terminated by the respondents and orders were issued for recovery of money under Clauses 4.3.3.3 and 4.3.38.1 from the appellants as arrear of land revenue under the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959. The appellants raised a dispute before the Superintending Engineer (for short 'S.E.') contending th...
Mangilal and ors. Vs. Dambarlal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: AIR2008MP118; 2008(1)MPHT68; 2007(4)MPLJ200
ORDERViney Mittal, J.1. The plaintiffs are the petitioners before this Court. They are aggrieved against an order dated November 8, 2006 passed by the Trial Judge, whereby an application filed by the plaintiffs under Section 49 of the Registration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') has been dismissed and a document in question dated February 9,2002 has not been permitted to be led in evidence even for collateral purposes.The plaintiffs had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction claiming absolute ownership of the suit property by alleging that the property in question had fallen to their exclusive share on a family partition. For the aforesaid purposes, the plaintiffs have relied upon an affidavit dated February 9, 2002.2. The suit is being contested by the defendant No. 1-Dambarlal. During the course of evidence of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs wanted to produce the aforesaid affidavit on record, which was objected by the defendant No. 1 on the ground that the said ...
Tomar Construction Company Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT164
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. Challenging the action of the State Government/respondent-Corporation in insisting upon producing no dues certificate from the Collector or showing proof for payment of royalty for the minerals consumed by the petitioners in execution of the contract in question, petitioners have filed this petition.2. Petitioners have executed the contract in question and for the purpose of doing the work awarded by the contract certain minerals are to be used as raw material. According to the petitioners the minerals and other raw materials are purchased from the open market from various authorized and licensed dealers. After the contract is executed now when the bills are to be settled, grievance of the petitioners are that respondents are insisting upon producing royalty payment receipts or no due certificate with regard to payment of royalty for the mineral consumed before clearing the bills of the petitioners for payment.3. Petitioners contended that in view of the princ...
Anandilal Chourasia and anr. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)MPHT501; 2007(4)MPLJ472; AIR2008MP257; 2008(6)AIRKarR86(FB)
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The petitioner No. 1 is an Advocate from Village Patna Tamoli, Thana Saleha, Tehsil Gunor, District Panna. The petitioner No. 2 is a retired Government servant from the same Village Patna Tamoli. On 5-8-2002, one Mallu Sen, aged about 70 years, expired in Village Patna Tamoli. Next morning, when preparations were made for his funeral, Smt. Kuttibai, his wife, jumped on to the funeral pyre and died. The incident got wide publicity and the State Government set up an inquiry and a team of State Commission for Women went to Village Patna Tamoli and submitted a report. The cabinet of the State Government took a decision to stop all kinds of financial assistance to Patna Tamoli Gram Panchayat for a period of two years and also requested the Central Government not to extend any financial assistance to the Gram Panchayat. This decision of the State Government was communicated by a letter dated 28-8-2002 of the Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department to t...
Ashok Kumar and anr. Vs. Late S.R. Verma Through L.Rs. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT114
S.K. Seth, J.1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of connected Second Appeal No. 39/2006 as both arise from a common judgment and decree passed by XXth Additional District Judge Indore. For the sake of convenience, I have taken up the above appeal as the main case, which has been preferred by the tenants. They have lost in both the Courts below. Dispute relates to eviction of appellants from a non-residential accommodation situated in Kesera Bazar Indore more particularly described in the plaint. The other appeal is by the co-owner of the suit accommodation. Both appeals were admitted on 7-3-2006 on the following substantial question of law:(1) Whether both the Courts have committed an error of law by holding that one co-sharer of the property can file a suit for eviction, in view of the objection by the another cosharer of the property in the facts and circumstances of the case?(2) Whether a decree for eviction can be passed in favour of the plaintiff/respondent in the fact...
Goverdhan Gurjar and Ramavtar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Two ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT49; 2007(4)MPLJ618
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. A learned Single Judge of this Court having found divergence of opinion expressed by the two Division Benches in Amar Singh v. Raghuvir Singh and Ors. 1980 RN 6, and in Daya Ram and Anr. v. State of M.P. and Ors. 2003 (4) M.P.H.T. 435 (DB), on the interpretation of Sections 234 and 237 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), has, by a common order passed in these two writ petitions, referred the matter to a Larger Bench to resolve the conflict of opinion in the two decisions.We have heard Mr. Mukesh Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner in W.P. No. 952/03 and Mr. Kumaresh Pathak, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents and we find that there is in fact no conflict in the decisions of the two Division Benches in Amar Singh v. Raghuvir Singh and Ors. and Daya Ram and Anr. v. State of M.P. and Ors. (supra).2. Sections 234 and 237 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, which were interpreted by the Division Benches in ...
Lilli @ Surendra Pandey and anr. Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT309
Ajit Singh, J.1. Appellant No. 1 Lilli alias Surendra Pandey and appellant No. 2 Pappu alias Pradeep Kumar Dubey have been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/- each with default stipulation by the impugned judgment dated 13-10-1999 passed in Sessions Trial No. 314/1996 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sihora, District Jabalpur. 2. The victim of the incident was deceased Shiv Kumari Tiwari. 3. According to the prosecution case, on 24-2-1996 at about 1:30 p.m. Ram Kishan (P.W. 8), while returning home during lunch hours on a motorcycle of his Deputy Ranger, received information that his younger brother Shiv Kumar was being beaten up. Ram Kishan (P.W. 8) immediately rushed to save Shiv Kumar and on reaching Majhgawan Road he saw appellant No. 2 dragging Shiv Kumar and appellant No. 1 repeatedly stabbing in his chest and stomach with a knife. Appellant No. 2 then fell Shiv Kumar on the...
Jamsingh Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)MPHT329
S.L. Kochar, J.1. The appellant has filed this appeal, challenging his conviction under Section 304 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo five years' RI, passed by learned I Addl. Sessions Judge, Sardarpur in ST No. 2/1990, the judgment dated 7-10-1994.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as put forth before the Trial Court is that on 30-10-1989, in the evening at 4. 00 p.m. deceased Badri and his wife Heerabai (P.W. 3), in Village Veerpurpada at their well were separating sesame seed. At that moment, appellant reached over there having farsa. One day prior to the date of incident, cow of deceased entered inside the filed of appellant and appellant chased the cow with farsa to assault. Appellant told deceased Badri that he would kill his cow at which Badri replied that he should not kill the cow, but he would kill him. The appellant dealt a farsi blow on the head of the deceased, resulting into his fall on the ground. At this moment, acquitted co-accused Ganglibai, Phoolsingh and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »