Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-20-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ4619
R.S. Garg, J.1. The applicant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 20-2-1998 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 1996 confirming the judgment dated 12-4-1996 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewa in Criminal Case No. 2259 of 1990 convicting the applicant under Section 420 read with Section 511, IPC and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for one year and pay fine of Rs. 100/-, has preferred this revision petition.2. The short facts necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are that the applicant Suresh Kumar Sharma on 4-10-1990 came to the office of Prabhakant Katare (P.W. 2). Executive Engineer in the Office of Rural Engineering Services and informed him that from the Secretariat of the Chief Minister letter No. 474/CMS/90 dated 1-10-1990 has been issued in favour of the present applicant with a direction to give him an appointment. P.W. 2 Prabhakant Katare got suspicious, therefore, kept the letter with hi...
Pramod Kumar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT485
Abhay M. Naik, J.1. Story of prosecution is that on 3-11-1986 complainant Hukumchand accompanied by wife Sheela Devi visited the house of his sister situated at Kharifatak Road, Vidisha for performing 'Teeka' on the occasion of 'Bhaidooj'. His sister Keshar Bai and her husband Mishrilal were residing as tenant in the property belonging to Chandra Kumar Jain, father of the accused. They reached in the house of Mishrilal at about 10:30 p.m. when Rajesh and Dilip (both sons of Mishrilal) came back from their business of 'Chat'. They used to run their business of 'Chat' on Thela. While coming back, they collected up one fused mercury tube light from road which was broken by Pradeep who also gave beatings to Rajesh. This was informed on coming back to home to Mishrilal. Mishrilal told them that he will apprise Chandra Kumar of the incident, who will further persuade his sons to behave properly. Chandra Kumar was residing with his family on the lower floor. Mishrilal came downstairs and appr...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ballu Alias Vinod Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT479
Abhay M. Naik, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the State of Madhya Pradesh (appellant) against acquittal of accused/respondent from the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.2. According to the prosecution story, Mishrilal son of Chironjilal was tenant in the house of respondent's father, namely, Chandra Kumar Jain. On the date of occurrence, i.e., 3-11-1986 Rajesh and Dilip, sons of Mishrilal (P.W. 1) were returning to their home when landlord's son, namely, Praveen picked up quarrel with them and gave beatings to Rajesh. He also broke fused mercury' tube light which was collected by Rajesh and Dilip from the road. On return, Rajesh and Dilip made complaint to their father Mishrilal in presence of complainant Hukumchand (P.W. 3), who happened to be there with his wife Sheela Devi for celebrating 'Bhai Dooj'. Hukumchand was brother of Mishrilal's wife. Mishrilal told his sons that he will persuade Chandra Kumar, father of respondent to make his sons ...
Gopal Pathak and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3551
Dipak Misra, J.1. The accused/appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused persons') have preferred the present appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') being dissatisfied with and aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdol in Sessions Trial No. 47/1985 whereby he has found them guilty under Sections 302/34, 201 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity 'the IPC') and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months on the first score, rigorous imprisonment for five years each on the second count and rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- each, in default, to suffer further simple imprisonment of two months on the third count with the stipulation that all the sentences shall be concurrent.2. Briefly stated, the ...
Ruchir Kumar JaIn Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2008
Reported in: AIR2009MP12
Prakash Shrivastava, J.1. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue writ of mandamus to the respondents to admit the petitioner in M.D. Course in Medicine at MGM Medical College, Indore or in M.S. Course in General Surgery at S. S. Medical College, Rewa on the vacant seat of 2007 batch.2. The material facts in brief, as stated in the writ petition are that the petitioner after passing MBBS Examination from S. S. Medical College, Rewa had appeared in Pre P. G. Test-2007 and secured 124.70 marks out of 200 and was placed at Serial No. 280 in waiting merit list of unreserved category. It is alleged that the programme for the second counselling was not advertised in the newspapers in terms of Rule 20(2) of Madhya Pradesh Medical and Dental Post Graduate Course Entrance Examination Rules, 2007 (in brief 'the Rules') consequently, the petitioner could not appear in the second counselling which closed at rank No. 299 for unreserved category. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed ...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ranidevi and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1169
P.K. Jaiswal, J.1. This appeal is filed by the insurance company under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') challenging the order dated 12.9.2000 passed by Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation No. 2, Gwaiior in Case No. 1 of 1995-W.C.A. (Fatal).2. (a) In M.A. No. 734 of 2000 filed by the insurance company, Badri Prasad Tiwari, aged 20 years, husband of Ranidevi, respondent No. 1, died in a vehicular accident on 28.3.1994. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are widow and son of the deceased respectively. The respondent No. 3 is the wife of the respondent No. 2. They filed an application for compensation before the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation. The Commissioner by the impugned order has awarded an amount of Rs. 81,864 as compensation plus penalty of Rs. 40,000 on delay in paying the compensation and interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the amount of compensation. Learned Commissioner held that the appellant and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 be...
State of Madhya Pradesh and ors. Vs. Subhash Chandra Agrawal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT227
ORDERS. Samvatsar, J.1. This appeal is filed by the State Government being aggrieved by the order dated 23/8/2007 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in WP No. 2529/2006(S), whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the petition filed by respondent Subhash Chandra Agrawal and quashed the order dated 8/3/2006 (Annexure P-1) of the respondents, whereby they have refused to grant benefit of second time bound promotion on the ground that he was not found fit for higher pay scale.2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent Subhash Chandra Agrawal was appointed as Stenographer Grade-III in the year 1974. He was given the first benefit of higher pay scale in the year 1989 under the time bound scheme framed by the State Government and he was promoted to the post of Stenographer Grade-II.3. The State Government has framed a policy, which was notified on 19/4/1999 (Annexure P-3) for giving benefits of time bound promotion to the Government servants after completion of 12 years...
Rakesh Sethi Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: AIR2008MP246; 2008(5)MPHT181
ORDER1. Challenging the validity of Rule 55-A inserted in the M.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 1994') vide Notification (Annexure P/l) dated 15-2-2001, petitioner has filed this petition seeking a declaration to the effect that the aforesaid rule is ultra vires to Section 64 read with Section 41 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1988') and is also violative of Article 14, of the Constitution of India.2. Petitioner claims to be owner of a motor-cycle purchased by him sometime in May, 2004 and for the registration of which the requisite application, in Form No. 20, prescribed under the Rules of 1944 was submitted on 25-5-2004 before respondent No. 4. Vide order dated 27-5-2004, respondent No. 4 rejected the aforesaid application on the ground that prayer made by the petitioner for allotment of registration number 'MP-KL-4646' cannot be accepted, as the petitioner has not paid the requisite fee prescribed for allotment...
Amarjit Singh Vs. Armor Finance and Commerce Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT505
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of FA No. 270/2002 as in both the cases parties and the dispute is one and the same. MA No. 368/2005 is against the order dated 25-09-2004 passed by VI ADJ, Indore in MJC No. 13/ 2004 whereby the application filed by appellants under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (which shall be referred hereinafter as 'AC Act') was dismissed, while FA No. 270/2002 is against the order dated 04-03-2002 passed by VI ADJ, Indore in civil suit No. 1 - A/2002 whereby the suit filed by appellants and the application filed under Section 34 of the AC Act was dismissed.2. Short facts of the case are that respondent M/s. Armor Finance and Commerce Limited, Indore gave loan for purchase of Maruti 800 car to the tune of Rs. 1,91,000/- to deceased Gurudevsingh, whose legal representatives are appellants herein. The total amount was repayable in 24 installments alongwith interest for which 24 advance cheques were given by dece...
Godfrey Philips India Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)17VST465(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Regard being had to the similitude and interconnectivity of the controversy that is involved in this batch of writ petitions it is disposed of by a singular order. It is condign to state at the outset that in some of the writ petitions, the constitutional validity of the provisions contained in the M.P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (for brevity, 'the 1976 Act') is called in question and prayer has been made to declare the entire enactment ultra vires Articles 301 and 304(b) of the Constitution and in some of the writ petitions the assail is to the constitutional validity of the notifications issued under the 1976 Act on the foundation that they invite the frown on Article 301 of the Constitution and also fall foul of Article 14 of the Constitution. Keeping in view the nature of the challenge and the contours of the attack I will advert to the issue of validity of the Act first and thereafter I shall dwell upon the substantiality and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »