Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)MPLJ74
ORDERDeepak Verma, J.1. This order shall also govern disposal of M.Cr.C. No. 10497/2005 (Shankar Mihani and Ors. v. State of M.P.) and M.Cr.C. No. 10538/2005 (Jitendra Bhawsar and Ors. v. State of M.P.) as common question of law as to applicability of the provisions of Chapter VII-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') is involved in all the aforesaid petitions.2. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Itarsi, moved applications before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Itarsi for initiating proceedings against the petitioners under Chapter VII-A of the Code and to pass appropriate orders for attachment and forfeiture of the properties which could be identified to have been derived from or used in commission of offence and out of their criminal activities. According to police, petitioners were involved in criminal activities since long and had accumulated huge wealth derived directly or indirectly by or such criminal and unlawful activities. Accor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2008ACJ560
A.K. Mishra, J.1. These two appeals are arising out of the same award dated 17.12.1999 passed by Additional Member of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sheopur under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in Claim Case No. 3 of 1991.2. Claimants filed this claim petition claiming compensation of Rs. 64,40,000 on account of death of Naresh Kumar in an accident on 10.6.1991 when he was travelling in a jeep No. RNO 6062 which was owned and driven by Man Mohan in a negligent manner due to that it turned turtle. Naresh Kumar died on the spot and others sustained injuries. An F.I.R. was lodged and offence was registered against Man Mohan under Sections 304A, 279 and 337 of Indian Penal Code.3. It was claimed that 14 bighas of agricultural land had fallen in the share of deceased in family partition. The family owned 28 bighas of the land that used to be looked after by the deceased. Annual loss was assessed at Rs. 1,70,000. Man Mohan died during the pendency of the claim petition. Hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(2)ARBLR224(MP)
Arun Mishra, J.1. The appeal has been preferred under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 by the lessee aggrieved by judgment dated 20.11.2003 passed by Fifth Additional District Judge, Bhopal in the case-RSC No. 97-A/01.2. The facts giving rise to the appeal are that on 22.11.1985 the appellant firm-M.P. Food Products Ltd. entered into a lease agreement with the M.P. Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd., Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'). The Corporation had floated tender for leasing out its Canning Unit at Bhopal. The offer made by the appellant to obtain it on the rent of Rs. 6,663.33 per month, was accepted. Initially the period of lease was 5 years, on 01.04.1986 the possession was given. The rent was not paid and certain disputes were raised by the appellant. One after the other six arbitrators were appointed. First three arbitrators had to be changed, fourth arbitrator Shri S.S. Sharma submitted resignation after recording of the evidence. Fifth ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (2008)17VST465(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Regard being had to the similitude and interconnectivity of the controversy that is involved in this batch of writ petitions it is disposed of by a singular order. It is condign to state at the outset that in some of the writ petitions, the constitutional validity of the provisions contained in the M.P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (for brevity, 'the 1976 Act') is called in question and prayer has been made to declare the entire enactment ultra vires Articles 301 and 304(b) of the Constitution and in some of the writ petitions the assail is to the constitutional validity of the notifications issued under the 1976 Act on the foundation that they invite the frown on Article 301 of the Constitution and also fall foul of Article 14 of the Constitution. Keeping in view the nature of the challenge and the contours of the attack I will advert to the issue of validity of the Act first and thereafter I shall dwell upon the substantiality and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2008MP142; 2008(2)MPHT490
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The petitioner, an organization working for the legal rights of oustee families affected by the large dams in the Narmada Valley, has filed this Public Interest Litigation for appropriate directions for the rehabilitation and resettlement of the oustee families of the Omkareshwar Project in the State of Madhya Pradesh.Facts of the case2. The background facts in short are that on 6th July, 1968, the State of Gujarat made a complaint to the Government of India under Section 3 of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 stating that a water dispute has arisen between the States of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashra over the use, distribution and control of water of Narmada, an inter-State river. The Central Government constituted the 'Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal' (for short 'the NWDT') for adjudication of the water dispute, by notification dated 6th October, 1969 and made a reference of the water dispute to the NWDT. The NWDT made an award, called, the 'N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1990MP171; 1990(0)MPLJ253
V.D. Gyani, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners (in all 23) have challenged the'Rules' for admission to Post-Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses in Medical Colleges of the State of Madhya Pradesh, as also the rules for allotment of House-jobs, in the Hospitals attached to the Medical Colleges in t-he State.2. It is an. admitted position at these admissions to Post-Graduate Courses are governed by executive instructions issued by the State Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India, although they are titled as Madhya Pradesh Selection for Post-Graduate Courses (Clinical, Para-clinical and Non-Clinical Courses) in Medical Colleges of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as P.G. Rules). The rules pertaining to Diploma Courses are referred to as 'Diploma Rules'. These rules have been annexed to the petition as Annexures P/1 and P/3. It may also be noted that though titled and called as 'Rules', they are not sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(4)MPHT453
ORDERViney Mittal, J. 1. This issue projected for determination before this Court is:2. Whether for the purpose of carrying on the business of producing and selling of Bt cotton hybrid seeds, a permission from the Director of Agriculture of the State Government or from the State Biotechnology Co-ordination Committee (SBCC) is required ?3. The facts leading to the aforesaid question may be noticed4. The petitioner-Seeds Association of Madhya Pradesh, Indore (hereinafter referred to as 'petitioner-Association'), is a society registered under the provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860, and is an association of persons involved in the business of the manufacture/production and sale of the seeds. Members of the petitioner-Association are also involved in the manufacture of Bt cotton hybrid seeds variety, which is a hybrid variety of seeds developed through gene transfer technology. According to the petitioner-Association, its members engaged in the dealings of aforesaid Bt cotton hy...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP169
Dipak Misra, J.1. Questioning the defensibility and substantiality of the order dated 14-8-2007 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 14605/ 2006, the present intra-Court appeal has been preferred under Section 2(1) of the M. P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005. The writ appeal was heard by a Division Bench which referred to the facts in issue, the provisions contained in the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (for short 'the Act') especially Section 50 of the said enactment, the stand and stance taken by the contesting parties and the interveners, the view expressed by the learned single Judge and the interpretation placed by him on the proviso added to Sub-section (4) of Section 50 of the Act by the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh (Sansodhan) Adhiniyam, 2004 on 29-12-2004, the interpretation sought to be placed by the learned senior counsel appearing for the Indore Development Authority (in short 'the Authority') and the proponemen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009CriLJ3708
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of Criminal Death Reference No. 1/2008 (State of M.P. v. Samander Singh), referred to this Court by learned trial Judge under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for confirmation of the death sentence passed against the appellant.2. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22-11-2008 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Guna in Sessions Trial No. 122/06, convicting the appellant under Sections 376(2)(f) and 302 of IPC and thereby sentencing him to suffer Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further R.I. of two years and to suffer death sentence and fine of Rs. 10,000/- respectively, this appeal has been preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.3. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that the deceased was the daughter of Meharban Singh and Shantibai. On 7-2-2006, the decea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
ORDERR.C. Mishra, J.1. As a common question of law has arisen in both the trials, this order shall govern disposal of interim applications (registered as I.A. No.48/2009 in Election Petition No. 27/2009 and I.A. No. 14/2009 in Election Petition No. 29/2009) under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'the Code') read with Sections 86 and 87 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for rejection of respective election petitions on the ground of non-disclosure of cause of action or a triable issue.2. Incidentally, none of the petitioners is an unsuccessful candidate but each one of them was entitled to vote at the elections in question. The respondent in E.P. No. 27/2009 namely Vishwas Sarang is declared elected to M.P. Legislative Assembly Constituency No.151, Narela whereas the respondent in E.P. No. 29/2009 viz. Dhruv Narayan Singh is the returned candidate to M.P. Legislative Assembly Constituency No. 153, Bhop...
Tag this Judgment!