Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2010MP21
U.C. Maheshwari, J.1. The appellants/defendants have directed this appeal under Section 100 of C. P. C. being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 22-7-2008 passed by 3rd Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Regular Appeal No. 7-A/2008 affirming the judgment and decree dated 30-, 6-2006 passed by 3rd Civil Judge, Class-I, Jabalpur in Civil Original Suit No. 494-A/2003 decreeing the suit of respondent No. 1 for declaration and perpetual injunction, against them.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that the respondent No. 1 herein filed the aforesaid suit against the appellants with respect of land bearing Survey No. 151 area 1.02 hector situated at village Tikariya declaring him to be the Bhoomiswami of it and also for issuing perpetual injunction restraining the appellants from interfering in his possession of such land. As per the averments of the plaint the aforesaid land was initially belonged to one Fagulal with whom the respondent No-1 was lived since...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT23
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. Writ petition has been filed calling in question the legality of the appellate order allowing the appeal setting aside the dismissal of the suit by the Trial Court under the provision of Order 11 Rule 21, CPC due to noncompliance of an order dated 14-1-2005 passed under Order 11 Rule 14(1) of CPC.2. Defendant had filed an application for directing plaintiff to file original documents of which photo-copies were submitted along with the plaint. The Trial Court has ordered on 14-1-05 that plaintiff to produce in Court all the documents which may be in his possession in original within three days of passing of the order. The Trial Court directed hearing of the application under Order 7 Rule 11, CPC on the next date. The Trial Court vide order dated 31-1-05 considered the effect of non-compliance of order dated 14-1-05 of not filing the original documents within three days. The plaintiff has failed to file the documents till 31 -1 -05, consequently the suit was ordere...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (2009)227CTR(MP)204
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This income-tax reference is made to this Court at the instance of assessee under Section 256(1) of the Act to answer 4 questions of law, referred by Tribunal. This Court by order dt. 6th July, 2009 [reported as S. Kumars Tyre . v. CIT (2009) 227 CTR 181 (MP)-Ed.] answered question Nos. 1,2 and 3. So far as question No. 4 was concerned, this Court observed on the basis of statement made by learned Counsel for assessee that the same need not be answered on its merit. In other words, this Court declined to answer question No. 4 on concession made by learned Counsel for assessee on its merits.2. The assessee then made an application under order 47 Rule 1 of CPC registered as MCC No. 244 of 2009 praying therein that since this Court has answered main question Nos. 2 and 3 against the assessee and hence, it has become necessary to answer question No. 4 on its merits. This Court acceded to the request, made by assessee and in consequence, while allowing the application ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT286
ORDERR.C. Mishra, J.1. Heard on admission.2. This is a petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'). The petitioners arc aggrieved by the order dated 28-8-2009 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ashok Nagar, in Criminal Revision No. 86/2009 affirming the order dated 6-8-2009 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ashok Nagar in Case No. 12/9/145 containing direction to remove encroachment made by them. In that case, the proceedings, under Section 145 of the Code, were initiated upon information submitted by SHO of P.S. Ashok Nagar in the form of htagasa bearing No. 7/09, arraigning the petitioners as party No. 1 and the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as party No. 2. It contained averments to the effect that a dispute between the parties concerning the land, whereon the petitioners had raised construction, was likely to cause a breach of peace.3. Accordingly, a preliminary order, under Section 145(1) of the Code, was passed by the SDM requiring the part...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT290
ORDERS.C. Sinho, J.1. Applicant/accused has filed this petition under Section 482, Cr.PC for quashment of Complaint Case No. 20579/2006 pending before JMFC, Jabalpur.2. A complaint filed by respondent/complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'the Act') against the applicant/accused on the ground that the cheque was returned for the reason that there was insufficient fund as well as the signature differs from the specimen signature on record, thus impugned complaint be quashed.3. The short facts of the case are that the respondent has filed a complaint case before the bank regarding a cheque of Rs. 57,600/- (bearing cheque No. 073512-482023001) dated 2-5-2006 of Punjab and Sind Bank, Jabalpur. The cheque was returned back by the bank stating that signature does not tally as well as the funds are insufficient. A demand notice for payment of the amount was served on the applicant. After receipt of notice applicant/accused replied ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT157
ORDERK.S. Chauhan, J.1. This criminal revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred being aggrieved by the order dated 1-6-2007 passed by Special Judge, Damoh in S.T. No. 83/2006, whereby the application filed by applicant for treating him juvenile has been rejected.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is facing trial for the offences under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. In this case, the applicant filed an application on 27-1-2007 on the ground that on the date of incident he was below 18 years of age, therefore, he be treated juvenile. The reply was filed by the prosecution mainly contending that the objection ought to have been taken at the earliest opportunity available and by passage of time he has attained the majority. The Trial Court directed to hold the inquiry and after recording of the evidence and hearing the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT160
Arun Mishra, J.1. The appeal has been preferred by the accused/appellant aggrieved by judgment dated 3-10-2000 delivered by IVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Rewa, in S.T. No. 153/99 thereby convicting the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302, IPC for committing murder of his wife Leelawati and daughter Santosh Kumari.2. The prosecution case in short is that accused was having evil eye on his daughter and wanted to commit forcible sexual intercourse with her which used to be objected by his wife and daughter. He was also having evil eye towards another daughter Mamta. Report was lodged on 8-7-99 by Ramnaresh son of accused. He was informed by Neelesh Kumar that his mother and sister were lying dead in the house, when he enquired about his father from his brother Laxminarayan, he informed that father had taken the bicycle and had gone towards the eastern direction. For the last 2-3 days dispute was taking place in the family. Merg intimation was registered at Nos. 12/99 and 13...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT323
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 10-9-2008 passed by JMFC, Ujjain, in Criminal Case No. 12504/06 whereby the application filed by the respondent for amendment in the complaint was allowed, the present petition has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioners on 1-7-2005 wherein it was alleged that on account of commercial transaction between the petitioners and respondent, petitioner No. 1 issued a cheque of Rs. 1,00,001/- on 23-5-2005 bearing cheque No. 739944 of State Bank of Indore and Anr. cheque of Rs. 5,00,000/- bearing cheque No. 739949 was issued on 15-3-2005. It was alleged that upon presentation, the cheque was not cleared and amount was not paid inspite of notice, hence the petitioners committed an offence which is punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which shall be referred hereinafter as the 'N.I. Act'). In support of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT182
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 5-7-2005 passed by Ilnd ASJ, Ujjain in S.T. No. 10/2005, whereby the appellant was convicted lor an offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC with fine of Rs. 2,000/- and under Section 135 of the Electricity Act sentencing him to undergo one year R.I., against which the present appeal has been filed.2. Case of the prosecution was that on 29-11 -2004, Junior Engineer of MPEB along with staff went for inspection, at that time, it was found that appellant was stealing the energy for the purpose of irrigation by running the motor of 3 horse-power. It was alleged that Panchnama was prepared and the electricity equipment from which the electricity was stolen were seized. Upon the complaint of the complainant, case was registered against the appellant at Crime No. 327/2004 under Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003. After framing of charges and also after recording of evidence, appellant was convicted as stated above, against which ...
Tag this Judgment!