Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
Balram and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3839
1. The appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellants aggrieved by judgment dated 19-3-1993 passed by the IInd Additional Judge to the Court of Sessions Judge, Rehli, District Sagar in S.T. No. 196/87 whereby convicting the appellants for commission of offence Under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo rigorous life imprisonment. They have also been convicted for commission of offence Under Section 498-A r/w 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.2. As per the prosecution case marriage of deceased Kusum Rani was performed with Balram prior to 18 years. The parental house of the deceased was situated at village Damoh. After four years of marriage relationship of deceased and her husband Balram became strained. She was turned out of the house. Thereafter she started living in the parental house at Damoh and fil...
Ramesh Chouksey Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT48
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. This is an appeal tiled under Section 2(1) of the M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 against the order dated 7-4-2008 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 4063 of 2008.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the appellant is a resident of the area of the Cantonment Board, Jabalpur and he had contested the elections to the office of Member of the Cantonment Board in the years 1976,1982 and 1992 and was elected and he was also the Vice President of the Cantonment Board. In the final electoral roll for election of the Cantonment Board published on 3-1-2008, the name of the appellant has been shown at serial No. 3832 but his father's name has been wrongly mentioned as 'Late Bhagirath Chouksey' instead of 'Late Deen Dayal Chouksey'. He filed an application for correction of the name of his father in the electoral roll on 17-3-2008. When no decision was taken on his application, he filed Writ Petition No. 4063 of 2008 under Article 22...
Shobha Vs. Krushnakant Pandya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: II(2008)DMC639
ORDERS.R. Waghmare, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by petitioner Shobha w/o Krishnakant being aggrieved by order dated 16.10.2007 passed in Miscellaneous Case No. 25/05 dismissing the petitioner's claim to maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.2. Brief facts as alleged by the petitioner are that the petitioner was married to respondent Krishnakant on 6th of May, 1982 at Ujjain. As a result of matrimony, petitioner wife gave birth to son Nilesh on 30.1.1983, however, within a short span, the petitioner complained that she was turned out of the house of the respondent husband by his family members, since then she has been residing on and off with her parents. The petitioner wife also gave birth to son Nilesh in her parental home and all the expenses had been borne by her parents. When she had taken the little child along with her to her in-laws at Badnagar, the child was ill-treated and had to be hospitalized despite which she returned to her husband's house. When final...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Jagdish S/O Dhannalal Malviya and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR866]
N.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 13.1.2005 passed by Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Labour Court Indore in case No. 103/99 WCNF, whereby the claim petition filed by respondent No. 1 for compensation on account of injuries sustained by respondent No. 1 was allowed and a sum of Rs. 33,621/- was awarded, the present appeal has been filed.2. The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:(i) Whether the finding recorded by the Commissioner that the claimant was employed with M/s. Indore Goods Transport Company, Indore as driver without any evidence is justified ?(ii) Whether the Commissioner is justified in holding that the claimant was involved in an accident and sustained injuries resulting in 31% permanent disability without there being any evidence. Further whether the Commissioner is justified in assessing 31% loss of earning capacity without any medical evidence in that respect ?3. Short facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 fil...
Manoj Kumar Yadav S/O Shri Jahar Singh Yadav Vs. State of M.P. Through ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT22
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 5.10.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 12970/2007.2. The facts briefly are that the appellant filed W.P. No. 12970/2007 claiming that the members of Sendri Gram Panchayat adopted a resolution dated 28.1.2007 under the supervision of Tahsildar, Niwari appointing the appellant as Panchayat Karmi of the Gram Panchayat and accordingly the appellant joined as Panchayat Karmi on 28.3.2007 and started working. But, all of a sudden the Collector Tikamgarh issued an advertisement on 30.8.2007 for recruitment of Panchayat Karmis on various Gram Panchayats including Gram Panchayat, Sendri. Being aggrieved the appellant filed W.P. No. 12970/2007 praying for quashing the advertisement dated 30.8.2007 issued by the Collector, Tikamgarh and for permitting the appellant to work on the existing post of Panchayat Karmi. The learned Single Judge without issuing notice to the respondents dismissed the writ petition by th...
Smt. Girijabai Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR308]; 2008(3)MPHT83
ORDERS.K. Gangele, J.1. Petitioner has filed this petition with regard to payment of retiral benefits, gratuity, family pension amount and LIC of her late husband. The husband of the petitioner had been working as driver in Health Department at Khaniadana, District Shivpuri. He died on 10-11-2006 during service. As per the petitioner she is wedded wife of Mr. Raghuwar Dayal. They had been living together. There was no child from Raghuwar Dayal. The petitioner submitted applications for payment of retiral benefits of her Late husband, however the department directed the petitioner to submit a succession certificate in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter petitioner applied for succession certificate and obtained the succession certificate. Copy of the succession certificate received by the petitioner has been filed alongwith documents. Initially Civil Judge Class I refused to grant succession certificate but subsequently District Judge granted the same vide order dated 5-3-2008. The res...
Transline Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)15VST163(MP)
1. Heard.2. At the very outset, Shri Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate-General for the State, submitted that the constitutional validity of Notification No. A-3-74-99-ST-V(48) dated June 9, 2000 has been upheld by this Court in Writ Petition No. 28300 of 2003 (D.J. Laboratories Private Limited v. State of Madhya Pradesh Pradesh [2008] 14 VST 586 (MP). Therefore, the petition has become infructuous.3. Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that on earlier occasion, Section 17(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 was not brought to the notice of this Court and as the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Punjab v. Nestle India Ltd. : [2004]269ITR97(SC) was not brought to the notice of this Court, the judgment in the matter of D.J. Laboratories Private Limited (Writ Petition No. 28300 of 2003 See [2008] 14VST 586 (M.P)) deserves reconsideration by a larger Bench.4. Section 17(2) provides that any notification issued under Section 17...
Devidayal Raikwar Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT505
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. This is an appeal filed under Section 2(1) of the M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 against the order dated 14-3-2008 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 2766 of 2008.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the appellant applied for appointment to the post of Panchayat Karmi in Gram Panchayat, Deri. The Gram Panchayat adopted a resolution on 17-8-2007 for appointment of respondent No. 5 as Panchayat Karmi. Aggrieved, the appellant filed Writ Petition No. 2766 of 2008 challenging the appointment of the respondent No. 5 as Panchayat Karmi on various grounds. The learned Single Judge held in the impugned order that the appellant has an efficacious and alternative remedy under Section 85 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short 'the Adhiniyam') and accordingly disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the appellant to avail the remedy under Section 85 of the Adhiniyam. Aggrieved, the appellant has ...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Anjani Kumar Khare
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2893
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. The impugned judgment of absolvitur passed by learned Special Judge, Jabalpur in Special Case No. 9/88 acquitting the respondent from the charges punishable under Sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1947 (In short 'the Act') and also under Section 161, IPC on 16th January, 1995, has been made pivot by Union of India, through the Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, Jabalpur by filing this appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. In brief, the case of prosecution is that complainant-Devendra Kumar Gupta applied to obtain loan from State Bank of India, Gotegoan Branch through Industry Department. The application to sanction the loan was referred to the respondent for doing the needful and to put his recommendation on that application. It is said that complainant-Devendra Kumar Gupta approached respondent for several times in the Bank and requested him to put his recommendation so that lo...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dalchand Yadav
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2827
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. The State of Madhya Pradesh has filed this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Special Judge, Damoh in Special Case No. 7/92 acquitting the respondent under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (In short 'the Act').2. In brief the case of prosecution is that respondent Dalchand Yadav was serving on the post of Tahsildar in the year 1989 and is posting was at Tendukheda. During that period complainant Premchand Jain submitted an application to get the Patta of the Government land given to him, renewed to the S.D.O. On the said application, Sub-Divisional Officer directed respondent to submit a report. It is the further case of prosecution that in order to give report/recommendation in favour of complainant, the respondent made a demand of illegal gratification of Rs. 1,000/- from him and out of which earlier Rs. 800/- were paid by the complainant to the respondent and for the balance amount of Rs...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »