Madhya Pradesh Court February 2008 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.
Babu S/O Govind Bhilala Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT60
A.K. Gohil, J.1. Plaintiff/appellant has filed this second appeal under Section 100 CPC against the judgment and decree passed on 10-4-97 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 5A/96 by the First Additional District Judge, Barwani (West Nimar), affirming the judgment and decree passed on 20-2-96 in Civil Suit No. 13-A/95 by Civil Judge Class-II Anjad, W.N. This Second Appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Courts below erred in law in holding that the Civil Court jurisdiction is barred under Section 257 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code?2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant purchased agricultural land at village Chhapri bearing Survey No. 318 admeasuring 8.27 acre from one Umariya Bhilala, by registered sale-deed on 25-4-73. It is submitted that the appellant is 'Adivasi' belonging to aboriginal tribe and the seller Umariya Bhilala was also of the same tribe. Thereafter on 12-5-95, a case under Sec...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Deepak and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1493
Rajendra Menon, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging an award dated 16.7.2002 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No. 1 of 2001.2. Claimants-respondent Nos. 5 to 8 are the dependants of deceased Gulab Singh Bhadoriya who was working as an Accountant in the Regional Transport Office, Morena. It is stated that he was 45 years of age at the time of accident and was getting monthly salary of Rs. 7,968. He died in a road accident that took place on 3.7.2000 when he was travelling in a Maruti van bearing No. MP 07-N 2241 when it dashed with a truck No. MP 08-1729, claiming compensation of Rs. 16,00,000. The claim petition under Section 166 was filed on the basis of the evidence and material that came on record, age of deceased was assessed at 52 years, 4 months and 26 days and after assessing his monthly salary at Rs. 7,968, looking to the fact of future promotion, increment and increase of the salary because o...
Mrs. Kailashbai and Mrs. Puneet Kalra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)MPHT118
ORDERS.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. These petitions raise an interesting and important question with regard to the maintainability/continuance of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the case of preventive detention even after the period of detention is over if the detenu is likely to be visited with civil or other consequences to his detriment under the provisions flowing from detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988.2. For the purposes of this decision, reference is being made to the facts stated in Writ Petition No. 2899/2007 unless stated otherwise, as both the petitions proceed on similar contentions and are based on very similar facts except that in the case of detenu Nikku Singh, an application was made for his release on bail, which was dismissed by order dated 12-5-2006 while in the case of detenu Shyamsundar, no such application was made till the passing of the order of detention dated 27th December, 2006. Both t...
Bankelal Gupta Vs. Anand Saxena
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1772
ORDERR.C. Mishra, J.1. Arguments heard. This petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code' for short), is directed against the order dated 9-1-07, passed by IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa, in Criminal Revision No. 286/ 06 affirming the order of removal of flour-mill and oil-mill (hereinafter referred to as 'the mills') installed by the petitioners in their premises situated near Jai Stambh Chowk, Tahsil Huzur, District Rewa.2. The facts leading to the filing of this petition are not in serious dispute and may be summarized as under:On 3-3-05, the respondents Nos. 1 and 2, made a complaint before S.D.M., Tahsil, Huzur, District Rewa to the effect that the mills, being run in a densely populated area, were causing nuisance to the public at large as not only the dust and obnoxious smell emanating from the crushing machine and the oil spilkr were creating an adverse effect on the health of people living in the vicinity but were also formidable sources of noise...
State of M.P. and anr. Vs. Suresh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT56
A.K. Gohil, J.1. This Second Appeal filed by the appellant under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 16-7-98 passed by Additional District Judge, Sardarpur, District Dhar in Regular Civil Appeal No. 13-A/97, whereby dismissed the application filed by the State under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, which was barred by 12 days, saying therein that no sufficient ground is made out for condonation of delay. This Second Appeal was admitted on 16-4-1999 on the following substantial questions of law:(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Appellate Court below erred in law in rejecting the appellant's application for condonation of delay and dismissing their appeal as time barred?2. I have heard Shri Lokesh Bhatnagar, learned Government Advocate for the appellants, and perused the order passed by the Lower Appellate Court. In the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonat...
Ratna Parashar and ors. Vs. Kusumlata and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ207
Sanjay Yadav, J.1. This order will govern the disposal of M.A. Nos. 692 and 803 of 2001 arising out of composite order dated 31.7.2001, passed by Fourth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior whereby the Claim Case Nos. 71, 72, 73 and 74 of 2000 put forth by the claimants therein were rejected on the ground that the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle was not proved. The present appeals are against the order passed in the Claim Case Nos. 74 and 73 of 2000 respectively.2. The facts in nutshell giving rise to the aforesaid claim applications are that on 26.9.1996, Chandraprakash Parashar, Lalit Prasad Sharma, Bunti alias Dinesh Agarwal and others were travelling in a jeep bearing registration No. MP 06-D 0116. The said jeep was driven by Ramveer Singh. At about 10 p.m. when the said jeep had reached at loop road opposite Sharma Farm on A.B. Road met with an accident having head-on collision with oncoming truck. The said accident resulted in casualties of Chandr...
Dr. R.S. Mehta Vs. State of M.P. and 3 ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Reported in: 2008(1)MPLJ590
ORDERR.K. Gupta, J.1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 23.9.2000 (Annexure A-10) and order dated 29.5.2000 (Annexure A-12). By these two orders the respondents have promoted the respondents 3 and 4 as Superintending Geologist in the Directorate of Geology and Mining. The petitioner has contended that he is more meritorious than the respondents 3 and 4 and yet the claim of the petitioner has been ignored. 2. The facts leading to the present petition are that the petitioner as well as the respondents 3 and 4 were working as Deputy Director (Tech.), which is the feeder post for getting promotion to the post of Superintending Geologist. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner as well as respondents 3 & 4 were eligible to be considered for their promotion to the post of Superintending Geologist. 3. The matter with regard to promotion on the post of Superintending Geologist is regulated by the rules framed by the State Government known as Madh...
Arvind Kumar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1712; 2008(2)MPHT38
S.C. Sinho, J.1. Special Sessions Judge, Sagar in Special Case No. 3/92 recording conviction of appellant under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for violating the provision of Section 6(5) and (12) of the Madhya Pradesh (Khadya Padarth) Sarvajanik Nagrik Purti Vitran Scheme, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as 'Scheme' only) and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 3 months and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of fine to suffer R.I. for a period of 3 months. Being aggrieved appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.PC.2. It is undisputed that appellant was working as Assistant Manager/ Salesman in Seva Sahakari Sanstha Naryawali (Sagar). On 2-5-1992 an inspection was made by Shri Dharam Das (P.W. 1) Dy. Registrar Co-operatives alongwith Food Officer Shri Mishra and Food Inspector Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava (P.W. 2) and others. Appellant was working there as Assistant Manager-cum-Salesman. On inspection they found that the stock of 1 qui...
Swati Organics Ltd. and ors. Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Reported in: III(2008)BC80
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a First Appeal filed by plaintiff under Section 96 of C.P. Code against the judgment and decree dated 14.1.2005 passed by XII Additional District Judge, Indore in C.S. No. IA/05 whereby the plaintiffs suit has been dismissed as being not maintainable by rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P. Code. So the question that arise for consideration in this appeal filed by plaintiff is: whether learned trial Judge was justified in allowing the application (I.A. 3) made by defendant Nos. 1/2 under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P. Code and in consequence was right in rejecting the plaint2. Facts in brief are these.3. Plaintiff is a limited Company registered as such under the Companies Act and is engaged in the business of manufacturing dye intermediates and pesticides.4. The plaintiff obtained a loan facility from the defendant-Bank (State Bank of India) for their business purpose and mortgaged their immovable properties as detailed below by way of collateral securit...
Bhoorelal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT163
R.S. Garg, J.1. The appellant Bhoorelal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 31-10-2007 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Katni in Sessions Trial No. 114/2007 convicting the appellant under Section 302 IPC sentencing him to undergo R.I. for life and pay fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for two years is before this Court with a submission that the Court below erred in convicting and sentencing the accused.2. The facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that on 15-4-2007 the dead body of one Rampati was found in the field of one Hari Lodhi. On 14-4-2007 at about 8.30 the deceased Rampati went on a cycle to collect Mahua but on 15-4-2007 one Lakhanlal brother of the deceased was informed by Kailash Gupta that Rampati had been murdered. After receiving the information Lakhanlal went to the field and found that Rampati was dead and he had some injuries on his neck. Dehati Nalish Exh. P-7 and inquest report Exh. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »