Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT277
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The petitioner is working as Samvida Shala Shikshak Class II in the Government School, Sada (Goram), Block Mehgaon, District Bhind. He applied pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission on 26-2-2007 inviting applications for 240 posts of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Lower Judicial Services. He was allowed by the M.P. Public Service Commission to take the preliminary examination on 15-5-2007 and after being successful, he was allowed to take final examination conducted by the M.P. Public Service Commission on 5-8-2007. Since he was successful in the final examination, he expected that he will be called for interview by the M.P. Public Service Commission but he was not called for interview. He came to learn subsequently that he was not called for interview because he had completed the upper age limit of 35 years as on 1-1-2008 and was, thus, not eligible for recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Entry Level). Aggrie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(3)MPHT465
ORDER1. Appellant/petitioner M/s Mohan Auto Supply Centre filed a Writ Petition through Partner Mohanlal Nigotia praying for the relief to quash the order of termination of dealership (P-1), dated 10th August, 2007.2. It is averred in the petition that petitioner-Firm is the dealer of respondent No. 1-Company. Earlier dealership was of ESSO. ESSO merged into the respondent-Company, i.e., M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. Respondent-Company wanted to open outlet at Malanpur Industrial area. Respondent No. 1-Company requested the petitioner to arrange for suitable land. Assurance was given to provide the dealership of the retail outlet on making the land available. Petitioner requested his brothers to provide a piece of land admeasuring 150 ft. x 150 ft. = 22500 sq. ft. to the respondent-Company for establishing retail outlet. A lease deed (P-3) for a period of 30 years at the premium of Rs. 4500/- per month was executed. On 25-4-2003, the Company issued a Letter of Intent fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT182
ORDERSanjay Yadav, J.1. The petitioners are the occupants of shops situated in Chitranjan Ward at Raddi Chowki, Jabalpur as tenants. The shops are owned by respondent No. 3, who owes the liability to pay property tax to the respondent Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur which is not paid by him since 1997-98 to 2006-07 which has accumulated to Rs. 53,263/-. The respondent Corporation in order to recover the said amount and in exercise of its power under the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter shall be referred as 'Act of 1956') issued a notice on 10-3-2008 Annexure P-l indicating therein that the shops would be attached and a lock would be put to ensure recovery of the property tax due thereon. In pursuant thereof the shops were locked on 15-3-2008 and given in Supurdanama to respondent No. 3 on 15-3-2008, Annexure R-l/5. The locks were, however, directed to be opened by interim order dated 8-4-2008 passed by this Court.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT470
ORDERIndrani Datta, J.1. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.PC for quashing the entire proceedings with respect to Crime No. 59 of 2006 registered at Thana Padav, District Gwalior for offence punishable under Sections 498A and 323/34 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act initiated against the petitioners and pending before JMFC, Gwalior.2. As per petitioners, the facts stated in brief are that petitioner No. 1 Ankush Golecha was married with respondent No. 2 Smt. Shweta Golecha according to Hindu religion. Their marriage did not last longer and a decree of mutual divorce under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act was granted by Principal Judge of Family Court in Case No. 86-A of 2007 on the terms of giving Rs. 32 lacs for maintenance of Smt. Shweta Golecha and her son Viraj Golecha @ Veer Jain. Criminal Trial No. 4995 of 2007 was also pending in the Court of JMFC, Gwalior against petitioners. Both the parties thereafter filed compromise application...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP143
Dipak Misra, J.1. The controversy raised and the basic relief sought in these two writ petitions being inextricably connected, they were heard analogously and are disposed of by a singular order. As the edifice and substratum in W. P. No. 6950/2002 is pyramided on the bedrock of the challenge and assail to the M. P. Irrigation Rules, 1974 (for short 'the 1974 Rules') in W. P. No. 6302/2000, it is apt to adumbrate the facts in W. P. No. 6302/2000 for getting a clear and necessitous picture frescoed for adjudication.2. The petitioner, M/s. Orient Paper Mills Ltd., has a paper mill at Amlai in District Shahdol. It is a factory within the meaning of the Factories Act, 1948. Amlai village formed a part of erstwhile Vindhya Pradesh which was merged in the State of M. P. on 1-1-1956. The State of M. P. in its policy of 1961 had given promise and assurance inviting industrialists from all over the country to participate in the process of industrialisation. The emphasis as laid on the facts as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(3)MPHT101
ORDERR.S. Jha, J.1. The petitioner who was employed as Assistant Grade II in the establishment of the respondent-Corporation, has filed this petition being aggrieved by the order of his removal from service dated 25-3-1986 and the order dated 16-2-1995 dismissing his appeal.2. Before we advert to the facts necessary for adjudication of the present petition, it is necessary to take note of the fact that the petitioner was suspended while performing his duties as Depot Incharge, Ashoknagar Depot in Gwalior region. Subsequently, his order of suspension was revoked and he was posted at Jabalpur and thereafter at Balaghat. The impugned order of removal from service was issued while the petitioner was working at Balaghat and his appeal has been decided by the appellate authority at Bhopal, however, the petitioner had filed a writ petition which was registered as W.P. No. 521/95 before the Gwalior Bench of this Court assailing the order of his removal as well as the appellate order. This writ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT540
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.With the consent heard finally.1. Feeling dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded to them the appellants/claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') for enhancement of the compensation awarded to them vide award dated 17-4-2007 passed by 8th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 175/07.2. Briefly stated on 9-10-2005 deceased Nanuram was going alongwith Mahesh on his motorcycle bearing Registration No. MP 09 JX 8974. When the motorcycle reached at Tejajinagar, Indore By-pass square a Truck Trolley bearing Registration No. HR 68-A-7585 coming from Dewas side dashed the motorcycle resulting into death of the said Nanuram on the spot. The appellants/claimants being widow, son, daughter and mother of the deceased filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- from the respondents.3. The owner ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP238; 2009(5)MPHT271
ORDER1. In the writ petitions common question is involved with respect to interpretation of provision of Section 85 of the Wakf Act, 1995 whether the suit filed by the Wakf for ejectment of the tenant is maintainable before the Civil Court or such a dispute is to be adjudicated by Wakf Tribunal, under the Wakf Act, 1995.2. It is not in dispute that plaintiff in each of the case is a Wakf and suit has been filed for ejectment of tenant from Wakf property.3. In WP No. 8313/06 initially Civil Suit No. 30-A/2004 was filed on 13-2-2003 which was dismissed by the Civil Court on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to try the suit. It was triable by Wakf Tribunal, Bhopal under the provision of Wakf Act. 1995. Plaintiff filed civil appeal against the decision rendered. The appeal was decided on 6-10-2005 by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, East Nimar (Khandwa) in which plaint was ordered to be returned for presentation before the Wakf Tribunal. Judgment (P/2) was delivered. Accordingly the Civil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)MPHT270
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. All the aforesaid petitions are filed, challenging the order of Chief Executive Officer, M.P. Wakf Board, Bhopal dated 26-4-2008 by which an application filed by petitioner (non-applicant before the Chief Executive Officer) under Order 14 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, dated 9-1-2008 was rejected.2. The authority found that under Section 54 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' for short) it was not necessary for him to frame the issues to decide the disputes between the parties. Section 54 does not make applicable the procedure envisaged in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' for short). The Chief Executive Officer is also not a Civil Court and the proceedings under Section 54 of the Act are not under the CPC. Section 54(3) provides a limited enquiry in respect of encroachment on Wakf property and after issuing a notice to the encroacher, the Chief Executive Officer is empowere...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2010CriLJ73
S.L. Kochar, J.1. Both the appeals are arising out of one common judgment, therefore, decided by this common judgment.2. The appellants have challenged their conviction, by filing this appeal, under Section 304-B of the IPC and sentence of imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/-each, in default of payment of fine additional S.I. for two years each vide judgment passed by learned Special Sessions Judge, Mandleshwar, District West Nimad, in Sessions Trial No. 376/1996 dated 21-8-1998.3. The prosecution case in nut-shell as put forth before the trial Court is that deceased Kirtibala was married with appellant No. 1 Chandan before 414 months from the date of her death i.e. on 13-9-1996. The father of deceased had given dowry according to their custom and his capacity. After some time of marriage Kirtibala was harassed because of dissatisfaction of the appellants regarding dowry. Kirtibala was being ill-treated by pointing out minor mistakes in household work and for her slightly...
Tag this Judgment!