Madhya Pradesh Court June 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.
Mamta Vs. V. Rajak and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2433
S.K. Kulshrestha, J. 1. By this appeal, the appellant seeks enhancement of the amount awarded by the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Fast Track), Kannod vide award dated 2.12.2004 in Claim Case No. 40 of 2004.2. The appellant had filed application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation on the ground that while she was going in a tractor-trolley to Godna on 30.4.2002 and the tractor-trolley had been parked on the side, a truck bearing registration No. MP 09-D 4840 approached at an alarming speed and collided with the tractor-trolley resulting in severe injuries to her legs and consequent disablement. The appellant had claimed a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 but she has been awarded only a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from 16.9.2003.3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was a student of Class XI and on account of the said accident, she suffered fracture in both legs, of tibia and fibula as also th...
Dinesh Kumar Urmaliya Vs. M.P. Road Transport Corporation and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR820]
Rajendra Menon, J.1. Challenging the action of respondent/Corporation in rejecting the request made by the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the application submitted for voluntary retirement in accordance to the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2005, floated by the Corporation and making a prayer, for permitting the petitioner to continue in service, this petition is filed.2. Even though various averments are made in this petition and learned Counsel appearing for the respondent/Corporation has refuted the same, it is seen that a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 378/06 Pradeep Soni and Ors. v. M.P. Road Transport Corporation and Anr. and a bunch of other cases, vide order dated 20.7.2007, has allowed similar claim made by employees identically situated like the petitioner and it was held by the learned Division Bench that employees like the petitioner were entitled in law to withdraw their options for voluntary retirement within the validity period of the scheme. Th...
Chandreshwar Jha (Engineers and Constractors) Through Its Proprietor S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: AIR2009MP21
ORDERK.K.Lahoti, J.1. This application is directed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator to decide the dispute between the parties. The facts of the case are that the petitioner being a works contractor was registered with the respondents since 8.12.1984. On 27.3.1997 an agreement for replacement of damaged doors and windows including Chawkhats of colony at Garbi project was entered in between the applicant and respondent No.1 for a contract valued of Rs.23,40,552.14p to be completed within six months from the date of commencement of the work. The aforesaid agreement consist Clause 9, about settlement of the dispute and for referring the dispute to the Chief Managing Director, NCL for decision.2. That the petitioner completed the work in the month of August, 1997 and running bills were paid by respondent No.1 but the final bill of the applicant was kept pending for want of sanction of revised estimate as the contract value of the...
Smt. Kamla Bai Patel (Kuchwaha) Wife of S.K. Kuchwaha Vs. Smt. Vidhyaw ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT40
K.K. Lahoti, J.1. The applicant has challenged order dated 1.3.2002 passed by 3rd Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in execution Case No. 127-A/85 by which the execution application filed by the petitioner was dismissed on the following grounds :a. That after the preliminary decree the applicant had not taken steps for final decree proceedings as required under Order 20 Rule 18 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') .b. That even if the application filed by the applicant is treated as an application for final decree then it was not filed within a period of 3 years from the date of preliminary decree dated 7.9.1987 and was filed on 18.1.1996 which was beyond a period of 3 years as provided by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963.2. On the aforesaid ground, the Court below rejected the application. The order has been assailed by the applicant on the ground that on 4.9.1987 a preliminary decree was passed. On 21.10.87 an execution of decree was filed bu...
Anil Kachwaha Vs. Smt. Sunita Kachwaha and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT193
ORDERR.C. Mishra, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the maintenance order-dated 29-10-2007 passed by Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in M.J.C. No. 425/2007, requiring the petitioner to pay a monthly sum of Rs. 8000/- (Rs. 3000/- for respondent No. 1 (for brevity 'R-1') and Rs. 2500/- each for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (for short 'R-2 and R-3') as maintenance allowance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The following facts are not in serious dispute:(i) On 05-02-1996, the marriage of R-1 was solemnized with the petitioner. In the wedlock, they have been blessed with two daughters viz., R-2 and R-3. The petitioner is presently posted as Executive Engineer in the Public Health and Engineering Department at Kota (Rajasthan). It was on 24-04-2006 that the respondents were brought to Jabalpur from Kota by Mahendra and Jitendra, the brothers of R-1. Since then, they have been residing at her parental home at Jabalpur only. R-1 is Pos...
Kamlesh Singh and Shakeel Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT318
S.L. Kochar, J.1. Both the aforesaid appeals arise out of same impugned judgment, therefore, same are taken together and dispose of by this common judgment.2. The appellants have filed these appeals, challenging their conviction under Section 21(C) of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act') and sentence of RI for 10 years with fine of Rupees one lakh, in default of payment of fine each appellant was further sentenced to undergo SI for one year, passed by learned Special Judge (under NDPS Act), Ratlam in Special S.T. No. 45/2003, judgment dated 1-12-2006.3. According to the prosecution case, ASI G.S. Gurjar (P.W. 14) posted at outpost Bangrod, P.S. Namli received information from informant that from Dhodar to Ratlam on Yamaha motor-cycle No. MP09/H-298 appellant Kamlesh Singh Rajput alongwith smuggler was coming with smack. On receiving this information, memorandum of the information was prepared in presence of witnesses Chikulal and Lokendrasingh a...
Tukaram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT168
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8-4-1999 of the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Khargone in Sessions Trial No. 104/1998 by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the IPC for voluntarily causing death of his wife Kadvibai and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 250/- and also under Section 309 of the IPC for attempting to commit suicide and sentenced to one month's simple imprisonment.2. According to the case of the prosecution, the appellant suspected fidelity of his wife Kadvibai particularly with regard to her promiscuous relation with the father of the appellant. There were frequency quarrels between the spouses on account thereof. On 5-1-1998, the father of the accused had come to the village in connection with a death. On that day, the deceased Kadvibai, had left at 4 P.M. to collect cow dung. At 6 P.M., it was learnt by Dinesh that his mother Kadvibai was lying dead in the field of Ratan Patel...
Ballav Singh Yadav Vs. Kalyan Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT78
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of both W.A. No. 195/08 and W.A. No. 221/08. In both the Writ Appeals filed under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, arising out of the common order dated 28-3-2008 passed by the learned Writ Court in W.P. No. 1369/08 common question of law is involved.2. The brief facts of the case are that one Kalyan Singh filed Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the illegal and arbitrary action of the respondents in conducting elections of the District Cooperative Krishi Evam Gramin Vikas Bank, Shivpuri (for short 'the Bank'). The contention of the petitioner in the Writ Petition was that while conducting elections of the Bank, the percentage of reservation of delegates is determined to the extent of 90%, which is more than constitutionally permissible percentage of reservation of 50%.It was further submitted that the aforesaid...
Abhay Kumar Vs. Chief Manager, State Bank of Indore and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: AIR2009MP24
S.K. Kulshrestha, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of W.A. No. 548/2008 as both arise from the common order dated 12-6-2008, passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 3429/2008 and W.P. No. 3430/2008. The said writ petitions were filed by the petitioners assailing the action of the respondent/Bank under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by which on the allegation that the account of the borrower had become a non-performing asset, the properties were auctioned and steps were taken under Section 14 of the said Act for obtaining possession thereon.2. It is not disputed before us that the appellants were in possession of the properties mortgaged by the borrower, and after the account was declared as non-performing, remedy under Section 13 of the Act was resorted to. Since the property was in possession of the appellants, action was initiated un...
iffco-tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shankarlal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2618
N.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the award dated 3.10.2005 passed by Additional Member, M.A.C.T., Ujjain in Claim Case No. 26 of 2005, whereby the claim petition filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for compensation on account of death of their son Radheshyam was allowed and compensation of Rs. 2,70,500 was awarded, present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed a claim petition alleging that on 22.9.2003 at about 12 a.m. deceased Radheshyam was travelling in a tractor bearing registration No. MP 13-KC 4401, which was owned and driven by respondent No. 3 and insured with appellant. It was alleged that at the time when the offending tractor was crossing the Shipra river, because of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 3 and the flood in the river, Radheshyam died due to asphyxia. It was alleged that claim petition was filed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 be allowed and compensation be awarded. The claim petition was contested by the...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »