Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT104
A.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this second appeal shall also govern disposal of other connected second appeal being S.A. No. 573 of 2002 because both these appeals arise out of the same judgment/decree so too the suit. 2. This second appeal is filed by the defendant No. 1 under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment/decree dated 23-9-2002, passed by learned IVth Additional District Judge, Mandsaur, in C.A. No. 3-A of 2001, which in turn arises out of Civil Suit No. 6-A of 2000, decided by Ist Civil Judge, Class I, Mandsaur, on 17-11-2000. Both the Courts below, i.e., Trial Court as well as First Appellate Court have decreed plaintiff's suit giving rise to filing of this second appeal by defendant No. 1 whereas, the other second appeal (573 of 2002) is filed by defendant Nos. 2 to 6 contending that the appeal involves substantial question of law as is contemplated under Section 100 of CPC. So the question that arises for consideration in these appeals is, whether appeals inv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2004MP117; 2004(1)MPLJ285
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. This bunch of 12 writ petitions is filed by the State Government assailing the order Annexure P/6 passed by the Board of Revenue dated 3-4-2002.2. Sale deeds were presented by the purchasers for registration, the sale deeds are styled in the form of deed of assignment cum sale deed. Different sale deeds were executed each for a consideration of Rs. 4,16,667/-, plot value was shown at Rs. 3,50,000/-, structure value Rs. 66,667/-, stamp duty paid was Rs. 32,620/-. The sale deeds were registered by the Sub-Registrar (Registration), Jabalpur and transactions were recorded. Sub-Registrar opined that valuation of the land and building in the instrument is not proper and adequate and forwarded the same to the Collector of Stamps for determination of the market value of the property and the proper stamp duty payable thereon as per memo P/2 dated 29-6-1999. In the opinion of the Registering Officer each of the property ought to have been assessed at Rs. 38,77,000/- in acc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2004MP101; 2004(1)MPLJ38
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. Petitioners have filed the present writ petition for issue of writ of certiorari for quashing the order (Annexure-I) dt. 6-10-1990 passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, the order (Annexure-J) passed by the Conservator of Forest on 6-10-1990 and the order (Annexure-K) passed by the learned Sessions Judge on 4-4-1991 and also the seizure memo of truck No. CPQ-5990.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a manufacturer of Bidi. Petitioner No. 2 Shri Munna Khan is the owner of the Truck No. CPQ-5990 and is a transporter. Tendu leave being forest produce, the State of Madhya Pradesh has framed Madhya Pradesh Tendu Patta (Vyapar Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Adhiniyam'). Similar Acts are enacted in other States. Petitioner submits that the operation of the Act is confined to the particular State concerned. Adhiniyam of Madhya Pradesh is a complete Code in itself. Section 5 put restriction on purchase or transport of tendu leaves except in the manner pre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2003CriLJ2936; 2003(3)MPLJ171
S.S. Jha, J.1. This reference which has been made to resolve the controversy arising out of conflicting decision of the Single Bench of this Court. Conflicting views have arisen on the point whether a complaint for an offence under Section 379, IPC read with Section 39 of Indian Electricity Act is maintainable on the complaint of Electrical Inspector or an officer of the Electricity Board is also competent to file the complaint.2. The only question involved in the case is whether under Section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act, prosecution can be lodged on the complaint of the officers of M. P. Electricity Board.3. For the purpose of examining the controversy it is necessary to examine the provision of Section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act which deals with institution of prosecution. Section 50 of the Act is reproduced hereinbelow:'Section 50-- Institution of prosecutions.-- No prosecution shall be instituted against any person for any offence against this Act or any Rule, licence or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2003MP214; 2003(2)MPLJ371
S.P. Khare, J.1. This is an appeal by the husband under Section 55 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') against the judgment and decree by which his application under Section 23 of the Act for 'judicial separation' has been rejected.2. It is not in dispute that plaintiff Peter Messias and defendant Mrs. Jennifer Messias are Christians, the plaintiff is Chargeman Grade-I (Technical) in Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur (a Govt. of India Undertaking) and the defendant is a Teacher in English and Music in St. Joseph's Convent Girls' Higher Secondary School, Jabalpur holding M.A. degree in English Literature; the plaintiff is an accomplished musician playing guitar and the defendant is fond of playing piano; it is this 'common bond of music' that brought them together and after their courtship for 8 years they married at Jabalpur on 31-5-1980; unfortunately they have no issue out of this wedlock; they lived together in Flat No. 19, L.I.C., M.P. Housing Board...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2004MP1; I(2004)BC106; [2005]123CompCas677(MP); 2003(2)MPHT114; 2003(2)MPLJ161; [2003]45SCL63(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. In course of adjudication of proceedings in a Court of Law sometimes vexed questions and complex situations do emerge which demand imperative penetration and intensive discernment to clear the maze and pave a luminous path through the labyrinthine so that the litigants precisely know their exact podium and become able to ventilate their grievances as permissible in law before the right forum without remaining in a state of uncertainty and in-definiteness. Certitude ushers in the quintessential virtues of law in an organized society and the absence of the same creates a shambolic situation which is not only unwarrantable but also law is at loath and averse to countenance the same. The cases at hand fresco a picture which not only creates a stir and an unusual ado to judicial discipline but also provokes and in a way accelerates the institutional syllogistic rethinking to have a deeper and greater probe into the arena of controversy. The spinal issue spiralled to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT301; 2003(3)MPLJ428; 2009AIRSCW604
Dipak Misra, J. 1. These two appeals preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') being interlinked and interconnected and having arisen out of a singular award dated 5-4-1994 passed in M.J.C. No. 64/85 by the learned Second Additional District Judge, Hoshangabad were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment. In First Appeal No. 212/1994 the claimant-land owner is the appellant who is assailing the award passed by the Reference Court and in the other appeal the State of Madhya Pradesh has called in question the defensibility of the same.2. The facts which are essential to be stated for the disposal of both the appeals are that the State Government issued a notification under Sections 4 and 17(1) of the Act on 26-9-75 for acquisition of land admeasuring 6.56 acres of land forming a part of Khasra Nos. 49, 52/1, 52/2, 84 and 88/2 situated in Village Rasulia, District Hoshangabad. The land of the claimant admeasur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2003MP271; 2003(2)MPLJ48
S.P. Khare, J. 1. This is an appeal by the husband under Section 55 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) against the judgment and decree by which his application under Section 23 of the Act for judicial separation has been rejected.2. It is not in dispute that plaintiff Jhonson M. Joseph and defendant Aneeta Johnson are Christians, they were married on 24-4-1995 at Bhopal; the plaintiff is a Ticket Examiner in Railway and the defendant has done M. Com. and is working in a private company; the plaintiff's parents are living in Brindawan Nagar, Bhopal and the defendant's parents are also living in Govindpura Bhopal; the defendant after the marriage lived with the plaintiff in the house of his parents for a brief period from 24-4-1995 to 8-6-1995; thereafter they lived in a rented house near Ashbagh Stadium at Bhopal at a monthly rent of Rs. 800/- from 8-6-1995 to 15-7-1995; the defendant became pregnant and then she went to the house of her parents o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : II(2003)ACC281; 2003ACJ2117
P.C. Agarwal, J. 1. By the impugned judgment dated 8.8.1996, the Addl. District Judge, Vidisha decreed a civil suit in part and awarded Rs. 62,000 as compensation for death of one Narendra Sharma in an industrial accident with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.2. Claimants were parents Shankarlal, R-1, Geeta R-2 and grandmother Ramkali, R-3 (who died during the pendency of appeal) of deceased Narendra Sharma, who used to work in Durga Metal Industry, owned by the appellant, since 1981 on monthly salary of Rs. 300. The deceased was working in the aluminium factory on 25.7.1985, who was burnt due to vapours raised while extinguishing furnace as water had receded below the same due to negligence of the appellant. Dr. G.P. Tamrakar, DW 2, had insisted that he would cure the deceased and thus the admission of deceased to Government hospital was delayed up to 26.7.1985. Later, on 4.8.1985, deceased had died. Deceased used to earn Rs. 150 per month as overtime allowance besides mo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(2)MPHT97; 2003(2)MPLJ189
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. The question which arises for determination by the Full Bench in the present case is: 'Whether Sections 47-A to 47-D of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') are Constitutionally valid ?2. The M.P. Excise Act, 1915 has been amended by the M.P. Excise (Amendment) Act, 2000 (Act No. 22 of 2000) which has come into force from 1-12-2000. The penal provision in Section 34 has been made more condign and deterrent if a person is convicted for an offence for manufacture, transport, import, export, collection, possession and sale of intoxicant if the quantity ofthe intoxicant being liquor found at the time or in the course of detection of the offence exceeds fifty bulk litres. In such a case as provided in Sub-section(2) he will be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees but may extend to one lac ...
Tag this Judgment!