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.
Mullu Singh, Alias Yashwant Singh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ273
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5/10/1999 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Damoh in Sessions Trial No. 104/99, convicting the appellants under Sections 307/34 and 302/34 IPC and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment of ten years under Section 307/34 IPC and life imprisonment under Section 302/34 IPC with a further stipulation that both the sentences shall run concurrently , this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by them.2. The prosecution has filed charge-sheet against four accused persons, namely, Kamal Singh, Mohan Singh, Mullu Singh and Durag Singh. During the course of investigation one accused, namely, Gulab Singh breathed his last. Accused Durag Singh has been acquitted by the impugned judgment. In this manner the present three appellants have filed this appeal.3. In brief the case of prosecution is that on 14/4/1999 an information was received in the...
Dr. Pareekshit Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT414
ORDERRajendra Menon, J. 1. Challenging the order dated 20-2-2008 (Annexure P-l) passed by the State Government transferring the petitioner, who is working as Registrar, Awadhesh Pratap Singh Vishwavidyalaya, Rewa (hereinafter referred to 'APSV') in the same capacity to Dr. Hari Singh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, petitioner has filed this petition.2. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on two grounds:- (a) Frequent transfer; and (b) Malafides attributed to respondent No. 4 and the role played by respondent No. 4 in getting the petitioner transferred from Rewa.3. Petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Registrar after he was selected by the Public Service Commission, in the year 1986. He was promoted as Deputy Registrar in the year 1991 and thereafter as a Registrar in the year 2001. It is the case of the petitioner that he has an unblemished service record and, in the petition averments are made to indicate the exemplary service record of the petitioner. It is stated by t...
Dharampal (Dead) Through Lrs. Smt. Ashima Syal and anr. Vs. Hari Chand ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT510
ORDERS.K. Gangele, J.1. Petitioners/plaintiffs filed this petition challenging the order Annexure P-11 dated 24-11-2000, whereby the application filed by the plaintiffs under Order 38 Rule 5 of CPC has been rejected.2. The plaintiffs filed a Civil Suit for declaration, injunction, recovery of possession and mesne profits with regard to land situated at Gwalior named as Temak Bagh (in brevity suit property). It has a long history of persons who got the ownership and also litigation. Initially it was a property of Jagir managed by Madhav Rao who had two sons namely Bapu Saheb and Yashwant Rao, Yashwant Rao was the elder son, hence he became owner of the Jagir property and thereafter when he died in the year 1924 his wife Janki Bai became owner of the property. She executed a sale deed of the suit property in favour of Dharmawati Bai on 10-01-1963. Thereafter, Dharmawati sold it to Purendra Kumar by another sale deed on 27-12-1968. Then Purendra Kumar sold it to Dharampal and Rajendra Sya...
M.P. Nagar Nigam/Nagar Palika Karamchari Sangh and anr. Etc. Vs. Sate ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2008
Reported in: AIR2009MP71; 2009(3)MPHT233
ORDERAjit Singh, J.1. The order passed in Writ Petition No. 4196/2005 M.P. Nagar Nigam/Nagar Palika Karamchari Sangh, Katni v. State of Madhya Pradesh shall also govern the disposal of Writ Petition No. 3990/2005 Katni Transport Association v. State of Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner of Writ Petition No. 3990/2005 has also been permitted to intervene in Writ Petition No. 4196/2005 wherein he had opposed the reliefs sought therein. As a result both the petitions have been heard together.2. In Writ Petition No. 4196/2005 petitioner No. 1 is the Union of employees of Municipal Corporation, Katni (in short, 'the Corporation') and petitioner No. 2 is an elected Corporator of that Corporation. They have challenged the validity of communication dated 13-5-2005. Annexure P8, addressed by the Commissioner, Urban Administration and Development, to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Katni, directing him to stop the collection of terminal tax by the system of Naka or barrier which the State G...
Nandkishore Narolia and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT524
ORDERS.K. Seth, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the selection and appointment of respondent Nos. 3 to 6 on the post of Laboratory Attendant, initially the petitioners invoked the jurisdiction of the M.P. Administrative Tribunal by filing an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Upon abolition of the Tribunal, under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Rajya Prashasnik Adhikaran (Lambit Evam Nirakrat Avedano Ka Antaran) Adhyadesh, 2003, the matter has been transferred to this Court, i.e., how it has come up for hearing.2. Facts for resolving the controversy lie in a narrow compass. It is not in dispute that respondent No. 2 selected and appointed respondent Nos. 3 to 6 on the post of Laboratory Attendant in the Government College. It is also not in dispute that before making the appointment, no advertisement was issued inviting applications from eligible candidates nor the names of registered unemployed eligible persons were solicited from the Employment Exchange....
Smt. Charanjit Kaur Vs. S.R. Cable Through Its Partner Sanjay Mahore
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2008
Reported in: AIR2009MP66
ORDERJ.K. Maheshwari, J.1. This order shall also govern disposal of Civil Revision No. 136 of 2008.Both the revisions are filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 assailing the orders passed by the learned XI Civil Judge, Class-I, Indore rejecting the application of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Order VII, Rule 11 of CPC, filed by the applicant.2. The facts which are not in dispute that petitioner, a multi-media system operator, has entered into an agreement with non-petitioner on 1-6-2006, whereby the cable lines belongs to them had taken by non-petitioner for operation for the period of three years with effect from 1-4-2006 as per the terms and conditions specified in the agreement. Clause 14 of the said agreement provides for arbitration to a dispute, if any, arises between the parties, which may be decided in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or by the Arbitrator Mahilpalji and Manish...
Chhotelal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT15
ORDERSushma Shrivastava, J.1. Applicant has preferred this revision against the appellate judgment dated 8.1.99 passed by Sessions Judge, Raisen in Criminal Appeal No. 80/98, whereby the conviction of the applicant under Section 7(i)/16(1)(a)(i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter to be referred as 'Act') recorded by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisen and sentence passed on him are upheld.2. Applicant was tried for the offence under Section 7(i)/16(1)(a)(i) of the Act before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisen on the basis of complaint instituted by Food Inspector R.K. Singh. It is alleged that on 25.12.90 at about 8 'O'clock in the morning at Barna Colony, Badi, during checking by the Food Inspector R.K. Singh, applicant was found carrying 8 liters of mixed milk (cow and buffalo milk) for sale. Food Inspector R.K. Singh then introduced himself to the applicant and purchased 750ml of mixed milk from the applicant for analysis in presence of panch witnesses and gave h...
Kallu and ors. Vs. Antulal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT62
Subhash Samvatsar, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the defendant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 15-7-1998 delivered by First Additional District Judge, Gwalior in Civil Appeal No. 9-A/98 whereby the First Appellate Court has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 27-2-1998 passed by Civil Judge Class II, Gwalior in Civil Suit No. 46-A/90.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents plaintiffs filed a civil suit for declaration of title, injunction and return of possession against the present appellants defendants alleging that father of the plaintiffs was the owner of the House No. 7/15 new number 42/5 situated at Tatiya Pakhre Ki Payga near Saligram Darji Ki Bagiya, Taraganj, Lashkar, Gwalior. According to the plaintiffs their father constructed the said house in the year 1934 and the property was his self acquired property. Father of the plaintiff died in the year 1974 and after the death of father of the plaintiffs, plaintiffs became the owner of the proper...
Hemant Sharma Vs. Kishorilal Vanshkar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: IV(2008)BC34
ORDERB.M. Gupta, J.1. This petition is for impugning the order dated 29.7.2006 passed by JMFC, Dabra in Criminal Case No. 906/05, whereby the learned Judge has rejected an application filed under Section 203 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner on the ground that once the cognizance has been taken, the learned Magistrate is not empowered to consider the case for its dismissal under Section 203 of Cr.P.C.The only question involved in the petition is - whether a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before the expiry of a period of 15 days deserves to be quashed as being premature?2. To understand in better way, the relevant Section 138 of the Act is reproduced hereinbelow:138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc. of funds in the account.- Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a Banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or...
Prajapal Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT421
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The relevant facts of the case briefly are that the petitioner applied for the appointment to the post of Gram Panchayat Karmi in Gram Panchayat, Balodiya District Mandsaur. The Gram Panchayat adopted the resolution dated 8-6-02 for the appointment of the petitioner as Gram Panchayat Karmi. Aggrieved, the 4th respondent Ramchandra filed an appeal under Section 91 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Evam Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short 'Adhiniyam') before the Sub Divisional Officer. The Sub Divisional Officer did not find any illegality in the resolution by which the petitioner was selected and appointed as Panchayat Karmi. He accordingly dismissed the appeal filed by the 4th respondents vide order dated 31-1-2003 (Annexure P-12).3. Aggrieved, the 4th respondent filed Revision No. 52/02-03 before the Additional Collector, Mandsaur. The Additional Collector, Mandsaur vide order dated 28-7-03 (An...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »