Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : I(1995)DMC77
A. Pasayat, J.1. Judgment passed by learned Subordinate Judge, Puri in O.S. No. 39/83 of 1986/82 is the subject matter of challenge in both the appeals though on different grounds. The suit was filed by Jagadananda Mishra, appellant in F.A. No. 70 of 1993 purportedly under Sections 13 and 14 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short, the 'Act'), praying for dissolution of his marriage with Pravati, appellant. In F.A. No. 245 of 1991, by passing a decree of divorce, on the ground that Pravati was of subnormal state of mind which was incurable in nature. His case synoptically is as follows :He married Pravati on 4-2-1982, according to Hindu customary rites. After marriage he discovered that Pravati was suffering continuously from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that it would not be reasonably expected to live as husband and wife with her. She has incomplete development of mind and was suffering from psychopathic disorder of, mind, and, was possessed intelligence of a thr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1994(0)MPLJ936
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. This is an application under Section 44(4) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 1958 Act) by a dealer dealing in the business of whole pulses and broken pulses. In this application, the assessee wanted three questions of law to be referred to this Court but at the time of arguments, he restricted his submissions to seek a reference with regard to the questions mentioned at S. No. (B) and (C). The English rendering of the questions of law has been given in the petition and these are reproduced below :-'(B) Whether S.T.O. alone is competent authority to impose order of penalty under Section 7(6) of the Entry Tax Act and hence the impugned penalty is illegal and without jurisdiction?(C) Whether the impugned penalty can be said to be just and legal as it has been imposed by ignoring the Explanation that omission to affix seal as required by Section 7(1) of the Act in respect of transactions relating to manufactured broken Dal was a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1994(0)MPLJ692
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. This order shall also govern disposal of Misc. Petition No. 1578 of 1992. Facts in brief are thus : The two petitioners are holding the posts of Village Extension Organisers in the pay scale of Rs. 1,600-2,720/- and are posted at Banmore, District Morena, under the employment of respondent No. 2, a co-operative society registered and classified as 'Central Society' under the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, the Act'). The respondent No. 1 is also a registered society under the Act, classified as 'Federal Society' and is an apex body of Central Societies like respondent No. 1. The Managing Director of the respondent No. 1, passed an order dated 20-9-1992 (Annexure P/l) of transferring the petitioners Dinesh Kumar and Narendra Pal Singh Rana, on deputation to the Integrated Tribal Dairy Project at Raigarh and Surguja (Ambikapur), respectively. The order speaks that the two petitioners would have their lien in the services on their substantive post ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1994MP205; 1995(0)MPLJ397
K.M. Agarwal, J. 1. This is an appeal by the wife against the decree for divorce in favour of the husband on the basis of her alleged admissions in her written statement and on the ground of adultery.2. On 30-8-1990 the respondent filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (in short, the 'Act'), against the appellant on the ground of adultery. On the first date of appearance, the appellant appeared with her counsel, but as the Presiding Officer was on leave, she again appeared with her counsel on the next date, i.e. on 12-10-1990 given by the Court Reader and filed her written statement, which contained her alleged admissions and on the basis of which a decree for divorce was granted on 7-12-1990 in her absence, but in the presence of her counsel without recording any statement either of the husband or of the wife or their counsel. Being aggrieved, the wife has preferred this appeal, mainly oh the ground that the decree was obtained by fraud.3. Af...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1994(0)MPLJ681
ORDERU.L. Bhat, C.J.1. Petitioner's counsel submits that the amendment will be carried out in the course of the day.2. The owner of a Jeep registered as a private vehicle has filed this writ petition questioning the vires of explanations (7) and (8) to the First Schedule of the M. P. Motoryan Karadhan Adhiniyam, 1991, and seeking quashing of Annexures-A, B and E as also the demand for Rs. 5,400/- and to direct the respondents to release the vehicle in question on bond. This Court passed an interim order directing that the vehicle be released on the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee for Rs. 6,000/-. We understand that the bank guarantee has been furnished and the vehicle has been released.3. The respondents Nos. 2 and 3 detected that the petitioner's vehicle was being used to carry passengers for hire and reward on 29-10-1993. The petitioner claims that he had paid tax only on the basis that the vehicle is a private vehicle. He had not paid tax on the basis that it is a public servic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1995CriLJ2376
Tej Shanker, J.1. This reference has been made by Brother Shacheendra Dwivedi, J., relating to the interpretation of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter called 'the Act').2. Facts of the case are not of much significance. However, briefly narrated facts are that a complaint was filed under Sections 323 and 347 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(iv) and (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 before the Special Judge (Sessions Judge, Guna). The question that arose before the learned Sessions Judge was as to whether he had jurisdiction to take cognizance or not. By its order dated 14-3-1992, the learned Sessions Judge (Special Judge) held that the Court had no jurisdiction to take cognizance in view of Section 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the complaint was dismissed. Against this order, an appeal was preferred under Section 378(4) of the Criminal P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : II(1994)ACC267; 1995ACJ877; (1995)ILLJ910MP
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The deceased workman Shatrughna was employed as a driver on tractor No. CPS 9253, owned by respondent No. 1 (the employer) and insured against accident by the insurance Company (respondent No. 2). In the course of his employment, the tractor turned in the field and the workman Shatrughna died on July 4, 1981 having been crushed under the tractor. It is not in dispute that he was employed on fixed wages of Rs. 140/- per month.2. The appellants, who are parents of the deceased, approached the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (in short 'the Act'), claiming compensation for the death of the workman. The Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation, by the impugned order dated January 31, 1983 rejected the claim filed by the parents, holding that since the deceased workman was never paid any salary by the employer during the whole period of his employment and he having received support from his parents, the parents cannot claim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1994(0)MPLJ443
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. This is a petition under Section 13 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 (for short, the 'Act'), read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for refund of Court fee paid in excess by the plaintiffs/appellants on the memorandum of Second Appeal No. 39 of 1983, decided on 8-8-1983, and on the memo of Civil Appeal No. 188A/81, decided by the District Judge, Shivpuri, on 7-2-1983, between Harvilas and others and Tulsiram and others.2. This Court dismissed the second appeal summarily, observing thus :--'After the matter was remanded by this court, the plaint appears to have been amended, claiming relief of specific performance of the contract, though no court-fee had been paid. Both the courts took the view that in view of the order of the High Court the suit will be treated to be a suit for refund of money, i.e., Rs. 3,400/- only, and not for specific performance of a contract. The appellants are aggrieved by this part of the judgment and decree and submit that it is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1994(0)MPLJ910
ORDERA.R. Tiwari, J.1. The order dated 12th October, 1993, rendered by the District Judge, Indore in Civil Suit No. 17-A/93 registered on application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act (for short 'Act'), dismissing applicant's application, moved under Section 41 of the Act read with Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'Code') is under challenge in this revision petition presented under Section 115 of the Code.2. Facts are jejune. The N.A. No. 1 is the Government of India enterprise. The applicant is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and carries the business of manufacturing and sale of Boats. On 12-10-1988, contract was finalised between applicant (seller) and N. A. No. 1 (buyer), on Government's approval for four Petrol Boats to be supplied to Government of Mauritius as gift by Government of India at Rs. 45.10 lacs per boat, thus, total contract value being Rs. 1.804 crores. Some of the material terms, inter alia, were that - a) Shi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1995(0)MPLJ998
M.V. Tamaskar, J.1. This second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed in First Appeal No. 178-A/1981 decided by Xth Additional Judge to the Court of the District Judge, Indore, on 21-4-1986, arising out of Civil Suit No. 28-A/1979 decided on 29-7-1981 by the Civil Judge, Class II, Sanwer.2. This appeal was admitted on the following questions of law :'(i) Whether the learned Judge having found that lands in suit are admittedly ancestral properties, has not erred in passing a decree for partition in favour of the plaintiff?(ii) Whether the learned Judge has not erred in invoking Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act for founding a right in the plaintiff to claim partition?'3. The material facts which are involved in this appeal are as under :One Bondar had two sons - Bhagirath and Chitar. Bondar died some 50 years back. Bondar's other brother namely Kisan also died after the death of Bondar. Bhagirath had one son and one daughter - Jagannath and Ramkunwarbai. Jaga...
Tag this Judgment!