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.
Amar Sharma Vs. Smt. Seema Sharma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3445; 2008(4)MPHT526
ORDERS.C. Sharma, J.1. Regard being had to the similitude of the controversy involved in these two writ petitions, they were heard analogously together and disposed of by this singular order.2. The petitioner, Smt. Seema Sharma in W.P. No. 1309 of 2008 is aggrieved by an order dated 23rd January, 2008 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior in case No. 142-A of 2006 by which an application filed by the husband/ respondent under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Sections 195 and 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for conducting the second DNA (deoxyribo-nucleic acid) test in respect of the petitioner, her husband and her daughter has been ordered.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that an application for divorce under Section 13(1)(i)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was filed by the respondent against the petitioner making various kinds of allegations. It was alleged that the present petitioner/non-applicant was transferred on 19t...
Hardeep Singh Anand Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3281; 2008(5)MPHT172
A.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. This is an appeal filed under Section 2(1) of the M. P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 against the order dated 24-8-2007 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 4638 of 2007.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the appellant was running a Coaching Centre named 'Deepika Classes' preparing students for taking Pre-Medical Test, Pre-Engineering Test and other tests for admissions to MBBS, Dental, Engineering, IIT courses. On 8-6-1992, a raid was conducted in the house of the appellant at the instance of Shri Raghava Chandra, the then Collector, Jabalpur and thereafter a Criminal Case No. 314 of 2004 under Sections 420 read with Section 34, IPC was registered against the appellant. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed and after trial, the appellant was acquitted on 26-8-2004. The appellant then filed Writ Petition No. 4368 of 2004 contending inter alia that although the appellant was in police custody in Police Station, Go...
Anil S/O Bharatmal Vohra Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-2008
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT194
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. This is a petition in the nature of quo warranto filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashment of the order dated 30-12-2005 (Annexure P-2) issued by the State Government Nominating the 4th respondent as 'Member' of the Madhya Pradesh State Agricultural Marketing Board (for short, 'the Board').2. The petitioner claims to be a licenced trader of Mandi Committee Badnawar. He has filed a certificate (Annexure P-1) of his election as 'representatives of traders' issued under Rule 80, Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi (Mandi Samiti Ka Nirvachan) Rules, 1997 (for short 'the Rules').3. The State Government exercising its powers conferred by Section 41(1)B of the Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 (for short 'the Adhiniyam') nominated various members to the Board in addition to the ex officio members. The 4th respondent has also been nominated as member to the Board under category of 'representatives of traders holding licence' i...
Harikrishna Marmat Vs. Shabbir HussaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2861
N.K. Mody, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.A. Nos. 1694, 1695 and 1696 of 2008 as all the appeals are arising out of one order dated 8.4.2008 passed by the Third Additional Member, M.A.C.T., Mandsaur, in different claim cases arising out of one accident and also parties in all the cases are one and the same except the claimants.2. Short facts of the case are that all the claimants filed the claim cases alleging that on 14.1.2006 claimants were travelling in a jeep bearing registration No. MP 14-DA 0208 owned by respondent No. 1, driven by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3. It was alleged that the loaded gun was in the jeep, all of a sudden by applying the brakes by respondent No. 2 rashly and negligently the trigger of gun was pressed with the result bullet of gun injured the claimants, it was alleged that the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2, therefore, appellants are liable for payment of compensation.3. ...
Dr. Omprakash Lakhwani Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT360
ORDERS. Samvatsar, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the contractual appointment of respondent No. 6 Dr.S.K.Neema to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Orthopedics in G.R. Medical College, Gwalior on the ground that his appointment is contrary to the rules framed by the Medical Council of India.2. Facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the petitioner had obtained his MBBS degree from Jiwaji University, Gwalior in the year 1994. He had successfully completed three years post graduate course in Orthopedics from M.G.M. College, Indore in the year 2003. After completing his MS course in the year 2003, he applied for the post of Assistant Professor on contractual basis in pursuance of an advertisement issued by the Directorate of Medical Education, Madhya Pradesh which is Annexure P/8. This advertisement was issued on 22/7/2004 inviting applications for various posts. Petitioner as well as respondent No. 6 applied for the said post. After ...
M.i.S.C. Karmchari Sangh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR979]; (2009)ILLJ374MP; 2008(3)MPHT243
P.K. Jaiswal, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 6-9-2006 passed in VV.P. No. 8918/03, whereby learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant/petitioner which is a union, challenging the orders of closure dated 27-1-2000 and 11-8-2003 passed by the respondent No. 1 in exercise of powers conferred under Section 25O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act').2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 4 is an undertaking of respondent No. 5-Hindustan Development Corporation Limited and is a public limited company. The Company's Steel Division is at Malanpur and was established in the year 1992. The main raw material of the respondent No. 4 is electrical energy. On 15-10-1998, the transformers were burnt and, therefore, the production of the factory was stopped. The factory was closed on account of stoppage of power supply, therefore, it had declared layoff. The said lay off was challenged and...
Roop Singh S/O Rameshwar Dangi Vs. Omprakash Sharma S/O Indernarayan S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT501
N.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 31-10-2007 passed by Second Additional District Judge, Dewas in Civil Suit No. 4-B/2007, whereby the suit filed by the respondent for realization of Rs. 2,33,920/- was decreed in part and a sum of Rs. 1,36,000/- was awarded alongwith interest @ 9% P.A. w.e.f. 16-12-2003, the present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that the respondent filed a suit against the appellant on 15-12-2006 for realization of Rs. 2,33,920/- alleging that appellant was in need of money hence respondent lent a sum of Rs. 1,36,000/- to the appellant on 16-12-2003. It was alleged that appellant executed promissory note in favour of respondent whereby appellant agreed to repay the loan amount alongwith interest @ 36% P. A. It was alleged that as per the promissory note appellant agreed to repay the amount alongwith interest. Further case of the respondent was that respondent issued a notice to the appellant on 24-11-2006, which was...
Naseem and ors. Vs. Lokendra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2010
N.K. Mody, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 6.12.2000, passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Labour Court, Indore in Claim Case No. 16 of 1998 W.C.N.F. whereby, the claim petition filed by the appellants on account of death of Gurmukhsingh was dismissed, the present appeal has been filed. Appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case learned court below was justified in dismissing the claim petition filed by the appellants?2. Short facts of the case are that appellants filed a claim petition before learned court below alleging that appellants are L.Rs. of deceased Gurmukhsingh who was aged 37 years and was working as driver on a tanker bearing registration No. MP 09-7402 which was owned by respondent No. 1 and one Sattu alias Satyanarayan s/o Madanlal and insured with respondent No. 2. It was alleged that deceased was earning Rs. 2,000 p.m. as salary and Rs. 50 per day as travelling allowance....
Smt. Naseem and ors. Vs. Lokendra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR868]
N.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 6.12.2000, passed by Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation/Labour Court, Indore in claim case No. 16/98 WCNF whereby the claim petition filed by the appellants on account of death of Gurmukhsingh was dismissed, the present appeal has been filed. Appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case learned Court below was justified in dismissing the claim petition filed by the appellants?2. Short facts of the case are that appellants filed a claim petition before the learned Court below: alleging that appellants are L.Rs. of deceased Gurmukhsingh who was aged 37 years and was working as driver on a tanker bearing registration No. MP09 7402 which was owned by respondent No. 1 and one Sattu @ Satyanarayan, S/o Madanlal and insured with respondent No. 2. It was alleged that deceased was earning Rs. 2000/- per month as salary and Rs. 50/- per day as travelling allowance. Furthe...
Rukmabai and anr. Vs. Umesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2603
N.K. Mody, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.A. No. 2500 of 2007 as both the appeals are arising out of one award dated 21.4.2007 passed by the Seventeenth Additional M.A.C.T., Indore in Claim Case No. 99 of 2006, whereby the claim petition filed by appellants was allowed on account of death of Motiram and the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,27,000, against which the present appeals have been filed.2. In M.A. No. 2255 of 2007, prayer is for enhancement of awarded amount while in M.A. No. 2500 of 2007, which is filed by insurance company, respondent No. 2, prayer is for exonerating respondent No. 2.3. M.A. No. 2500 of 2007 is barred by 9 days for which an application for condonation of delay is filed. Since appellant has filed the appeal in which respondent No. 2 is having the right to file cross-objections, therefore, the application for condonation of delay is allowed.4. Short facts of the case are that the appellants filed a claim petition alleging that dece...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »