Madhya Pradesh Court June 2014 Judgments
Manoj Kushwah Vs. Chhotelal and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2014
Rohit Arya, J: 1. By this revision petition under section 115 of CPC, the petitioner questions the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 07/05/2014 passed by IV Civil Judge, Class-II, Gwalior in civil suit No. 71A/2013 by which petitioner/defendant No. 1's application under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C., has been dismissed. 2. Facts necessary for disposal of this revision petition in narrow compass are that defendant No. 1 has filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C., inter alia contending that though the plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration that the sale deed in question is null and void as against him, the suit has been valued on the basis of land revenue payable on the agricultural land which is the subject matter of the sale deed whereas the sale consideration in the sale deed is 6.00 lacs. According to the defendant No. 1, the suit ought to have been valued on the basis of sale consideration and accordingly, ad valorem Court fee was required to be paid. 3. ...
Tag this Judgment!Phool Chand Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2014
1. Appellant Phool Chand stood trial under Section 376 of IPC and has been held guilty vide judgment dated 26.9.2002 in S.T. No. 153/2001 pronounced by the learned First A .S.J, Guna, the appellant has been sentenced to life imprisonment. This appeal has been filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C assailing the conviction and sentence. 2. The undisputed facts of the case are that the prosecutrix is the minor daughter of the accused / appellant. Medical report prepared by Dr. A.S. Ojha which disclose, that there is no disease or deformity which can make the appellant incapable to perform sexual-intercourse, has been admitted by the appellant under Section 294 of Cr.P.C. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that Guddi Bai (PW-2),is the mother of the minor prosecutrix aged about 15 years has been examined as PW-1. Five days earlier to 24th February, 2001 the complainant Guddibai had gone to wash her face and hands. When she returned she saw that her husband (accused ) is committing sexual-interco...
Tag this Judgment!Seema Vs. Rajesh Dua
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2014
B.D. Rathi, J. 1. Being aggrieved from the impugned judgment and decree dated 23.12.2005 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior in case No.142-A/2003 filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 14.07.2003, this first appeal has been preferred by appellant/non-applicant Smt. Seema under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 on 20.01.2006. whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court has passed the decree of divorce in favour of respondent/husband Rajesh Dua against appellant/wife Smt. Seema. 2. It is an admitted fact that the marriage of Rajesh and Seema was solemnized on 19.05.2001 in accordance with the Hindu customary rites and ceremonies of the parties. 3. In trial Court Civil Suit No.142A/2003 was filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by applicant/respondent Rajesh Dua against nonapplicant/ appellant for the relief of divorce on 14.07.2003. In brief the facts of the case before the trial Court were that the marriage of applicant/respo...
Tag this Judgment!Kanchan Singh Kushwah Vs. Abdul Hanif and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2014
Rohit Arya, J: 1. Heard. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 07/09/2012 passed by III Additional Civil Judge, Class-II, Guna in civil suit No. 10A/2012 whereby petitioner's application under Order I Rule 3 CPC has been rejected. 3. Facts necessary for disposal of this petition in narrow compass are that a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell has been filed by one, Abdul Hanif S/o Abdul Saleem against Daulat Singh S/o Shobharam in respect of land falling in survey No. 52/3 admeasuring 0.270 hectare situated in village Saktpur, Patwari Halka No. 74, tehsil and district Guna (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit land'). The petitioner/applicant has filed an application under Order I Rule 3 CPC inter alia contending that a suit for declaration, possession and partition between the petitioner and defendant, Daulat Singh is pending consideration before the Civil Judge, Class-II, Guna. It is fur...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kari Bai @ Kali Bai vs Union Of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2014
With consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is finally heard. The Appeal under Section 23 of the Railways Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 at the instance of claimants, is directed against the Award dated 13.3.2014 passed by Railways Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Bench, Bhopal. The challenge is confined to grant of interest on compensation awarded which is restricted from 17.6.2013 and not from the date of institution of claim. The facts that Narayan Singh while travelling from Bhawani Mandi to Vikramgarh Alot by Local Train No.256 Up Mathura- Ratlam Local Train, holding a second class journey ticket on 3.8.2009 succumbed to the injuries sustained when he fell down from the train due heavy rush and push at Suvasara Railway Station and that the claimants are his legal heirs and that the death occurred due to untoward incident, are not in dispute. It is also noticed from the claim petition that Union of India, through General Manager, Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai was impleaded as r...
Tag this Judgment!Sachin Ahirwar Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2014
G.S. Solanki, J. 1. Heard. This revision has been filed by the applicant through his legal guardian/mother Trivedi Bai under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 2000") being aggrieved by impugned judgment dated 15-2-2014 passed by Ninth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Criminal Appeal No. 38/2014 affirming the order dated 31-1-2014 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jabalpur in Criminal Case No. 285/ 2013 whereby the application for releasing the applicant on Supurdginama, has been dismissed. 2. The facts, in short, giving rise to this revision are that juvenile Sachin Ahirwar was arrested in connection with Crime No. 370/2013 registered at P.S. Ghamapur, District Jabalpur for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148 and 149 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. After due investigation, he was charge-sheeted before Juvenile Justice Board. Thereafter, Triveni ...
Tag this Judgment!Shakuna Kushwah Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2014
1. This petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution challenges the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 24.04.2014 (Annexure P/1) where by the respondents have rejected the application of the petitioner seeking fresh electricity connection. 2. This is second visit of the petitioner to this Court. Earlier petitioner preferred application seeking electricity connection from the respondents. Respondents did not decide the said application which resulted into filing of WP No.2233/2014. This Court by order dated 09.04.2014 directed the respondents to decide the application within time limit. In turn, by order dated 24.04.2014 the application is rejected. 3. Shri A.K. Nirankari, learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the said order on the ground that petitioner is occupier and residing with her family in premises situated at Jai Vilas Palace. It is submitted that petitioner along with her husband is in occupation since 1982. Petitioner's husband retired from the serv...
Tag this Judgment!Ritu Shrivastava Vs. Dr. Shiv Singh and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2014
1. In this revision under Section 23-E of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), the applicant has assailed the validity of the orders dated 4-1-2013 and 8-2-2013 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority by which the application preferred by the non-applicants under Section 23-A (b) of the Act, has been allowed. 2. Background facts leading to filing of the revision briefly stated are that the non-applicants filed an application under Section 23-A (b) of the Act on the ground that they have retired as Surgeon and Doctor, respectively from the Health Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh. The accommodation in question, which admeasures 1007 sq. ft. situated in Mansarovar Complex, Bhopal, was let out to the applicant/tenant for a period from 14-8-2007 to 15-8-2008, and the non-applicants bonafide need the accommodation for the purposes of opening a mini-operation theatre and a clinic and that they do not have any other alternative suitable...
Tag this Judgment!Baijanti Bai Vs. M.P. Kshetriya Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2014
1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order Annexure P/4 whereby respondents have provisionally assessed Rs. 19302/- against the petitioner relating to her alleged act of electricity theft. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she is residing in the residential premises situated in Khurje Wala Mohalla, Lashkar, Gwalior. She occupied the residential premises after the death of her husband. It is urged that a complaint under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is filed against the petitioner. The said complain was frivolous and therefore, the Special Court in Special Session No. 1083/2012 exonerated the petitioner. It is submitted that after her exoneration respondents are not justified in asking payment from the petitioner which was assessed in provisional assessment order dated 07.10.2011 (Annexure P/4). It is submitted that petitioner has already discharged her entire civil liabilities by making payment of electricity bills. Copy of...
Tag this Judgment!Santosh Kumar Sharma Vs. Sooraj Prasad Shrivastava
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2014
U.C. Maheshwari, J: 1. Heard. 2. On behalf of the petitioner- defendant, this petition is filed being aggrieved by the order dated 31.1.2012, passed by the Ist, Civil Judge, Class-I, Katni in COS No. 71-A/11 whereby allowing the application of the respondent filed under Section 13 (6) of M.P. Accommodation Control Act 1961, (in short "The Act"), the defence of the petitioner available under the provisions of the Act has been struck down and simultaneously, the application of the petitioner filed to condone the delay and in extending the period with opportunity to deposit the entire arrears of rent and recurring rent of the disputed premises has been dismissed. 3. The petitioner's counsel after taking me through the petition as well as papers placed on record alongwith the impugned order, by referring the provisions of Section 13 of the Act argued that after receiving the summon of the impugned suit, the petitioner had given his appearance before the trial court and took adjournment on ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »