Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-30-2002
Reported in : AIR2003MP190; 2002(4)MPHT343; 2002(4)MPLJ354
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a revision by the plaintiffs under Section 115, CPC against the order by which their appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (r), CPC challenging the order of the rejection of their application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC filed in the suit, has been dismissed.2. A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the respondent No. 3 that the present revision is not maintainable in view of the proviso to Section 115(1), CPC. Reliance is placed by him on the decision of this Court in Sawal Singh v. Smt. Ramsakhi, 2002(4) M.P.H.T. 200 = 2002 (II) MPJR 169. This objection has been raised in several other revision petitions pending before this Court. Therefore, arguments were heard at length. Sarvashri Ravish Agrawal, Sr. Advocate, R.P. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate, R.P. Jain, R.S. Tiwari, P.D. Tiwari, Alok Aradhe and Ajay Mishra, Advocates have also addressed this Court on this point.3. The proviso to Section 115(1), CPC reads as under:--'Provid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-19-2002
Reported in : 2003(1)MPHT397
Ajit Singh, J. 1. Appellant Kishan, the sole accused person in this case, has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life by IInd Additional Sessions Judge to the Court of Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, vide impugned judgment dated 23-2-89 for causing the murder of Patiram, the deceased in the case. He has also been convicted under Section307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment for attempting to commit the murder of Sukhchand (P.W. 4). Both the sentences are to run concurrently. Appellant has been found guilty of causing fatal injuries on the person of deceased Patiram and causing grievous injuries to Sukhchand (P.W. 4) by means of a 'lathi' at about 9.00 a.m. on 21-4-87 at Dewardha Nala. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are as under :-- The appellant used to sell illicit liquor from his house. On 21-4-87 Sukhchand (P.W. 4) and Patiram, while returning after attending...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-29-2002
Reported in : 2002(4)MPHT200; 2003(1)MPLJ31
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J. 1. This order will decide Civil Revision Nos. 202/2000 (Sawal Singh v. Smt. Ramsakhi and Ors.), 286/2002 (Anokhi Lal v. Surendra Kumar and Ors.) and 388/2002 (Leela Bai v. Lottan and Ors.) involving same question of law. The facts of the cases are as under :-- (Civil Revision No. 202/2000) The applicant has filed present revision challenging the order dated 18-1-2000 passed by Additional District Judge, Khurai, Distt. Sagar in Civil M.A. No. 19/99, by which appeal filed by plaintiffs/respondents under Order 43 Rule 1 of CPC was allowed and temporary injunction issued against the applicant during the pendency of the suit. (Civil Revision No. 286/2002) This applicant has challenged the order passed by First Civil Judge, Class 2, Khandwa, in Civil Suit No. 170-A/99 by which application filed by non-applicants/plaintiffs under Order 6 Rule 17, CPC was allowed and plaintiffs were permitted to amend the plaint. This revision was filed on 6-2-2002 and admitted on 9-4-2002...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-20-2002
Reported in : AIR2002MP196; 2002(2)MPHT353
Dipak Misra, J. 1. In this writ petition it is imperative to bestow our anxious consideration on the long debate and deliberation that took place consuming quite a speck of time relating to contentious issues which took us in the time machine as the subject related to the past, creating defiant walls and artificial palisade and some times brought us to the present in capitivative fascination having an ineffaceable sense and purpose of modernity and progressiveness which, at times generated a feeling of puzzlement but definitely the incrassation and intenseness of proponements cannot be surveyed with disposition of a disregardant. We are deliberating and articulating about the 'vedas' the 'Apaurusheya'. The Vedas, as has been said, are the means for attaining knowledge, happiness through wisdom and self realisation which are beyond the sphere of perception or inference. So it is said :'PRATYAKSHYEANNU MANENA YASTU POYO NA ENAM BIDANTI VEDANA TASHMAD VEDASYA VEDATA'Possibly, for this rea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-18-2002
Reported in : 2002(2)MPHT570; 2002(2)MPLJ588
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. The petitioner, a young man in his teens, has approached this Court for issue of a direction to the Board of Secondary Education (for brevity 'the Board') to take appropriate and suitable action against the person who had committed some mistakes and further to award Rs. 5 lakhs towards compensation for humiliation, mental shock and the loss sustained by the petitioner.2. The facts as have been exposited in the writ petition are that thepetitioner was a regular student of Class XII of Pandit Lajja Shankar Jha Higher Secondary School, Jabalpur. He appeared in the Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination from the Centre No. 71012 in the months of March-April, 1999. The petitioner has narrated about the marks obtained by him in various subjects of his academic career to highlight that he is a meritorious student. The result of the examination was declared in the month of May, 1999. He was in puzzlement when he came to know that he had been declared failed in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-12-2002
Reported in : 2002(3)MPHT441; 2002(2)MPLJ125
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J. 1. The question involved in this writ is a short one. The question is whether respondent No. 4 was qualified to bid for the dealership of Bharal Petroleum Corporation for commodity popularly known as LPG or in other words, whether respondent No. 4 was eligible for being considered for the dealership of Bharat Petroleum Corporation for LPG The question arises on following facts on which the petitioner has sought this relief in this writ under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The respondent No. 1 is a Government of India undertaking. By advertisement published in News Paper dated 21-8-2000 (Annexure A), the respondent No. 1 invited application from candidates for grant of dealership of distribution of LPG cylinders for several districts in State of M.P. One such district was Shajapur. The respondent No. 1 had prescribed several conditions as an eligibility criteria for applying for the said dealership. In other words, candidates fulfilling the pre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-01-2002
Reported in : AIR2002MP98; 2002(2)MPHT10
ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. The pivotal issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition preferred by a learned member of the Bar whether the members of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh are entitled to continue even after expiry of their term, as envisaged under the Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The said issue being cardinal and dominant, I shall only confine to the aforesaid issue as the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents confined to the said facet, the singular and significant case.2. The facts which have been brought on record need not be dilated upon in detail, as the facts which are essential and necessitous for disposal of this writ petition have been conceded to by Mr. N.C. Jain, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Rajendra Tiwari, learned senior counsel for the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh as well as for the Bar Council of India. None of the othe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-23-2002
Reported in : 2002CriLJ3718
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The petitioners, namely, Sushil Kumar, s/o Shri Chand Mal and Sunil Kumar, s/o Shri Pal have approached this Court for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 10-4-2001 passed by the Probation Board under Prisoners' Release on Probation Rules, 1964 (herenafter referred to as 'the Rules') refusing to release them on licence and the confirmation thereof by the State Government by order dated 25-4-2001.2. I may at the outset state that the present writ petition has been filed by giving details with regard to the concept of liberty, human rights, divinity that dwells in human heart, rights of freedom and such other rights that are put on a pedestal. There is prolific reference to the saving of Wallace Strews, Mahatma Gandhi, the father of the nation and some eminent Judges to build the foundation that the orders of rejection and confirmation thereof are sensitively suseptible and cannot stand scrutiny and deserve to be axed by this Court in exe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-13-2002
Reported in : 2004ACJ461
S.L. Jain, J.1. Appellants-claimants had filed an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) for the award of compensation initiating the proceedings arising out of an accident involving a motor vehicle, a tanker lorry/ truck bearing its registration No. GTS 6130 wherein Manoj Kumar Jain, son of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 and husband of appellant No. 1, had met with untimely death at the age of 29 years.2. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, on consideration of the evidence and the materials brought on record by the various parties, had determined that the present appellants, i.e., the wife and parents of the deceased were entitled to an amount of Rs. 3,02,400 towards loss of dependency, Rs. 5,000 towards loss of consortium and Rs. 2,000 for the expenses of the last rites of the deceased, total of which comes to Rs. 3,09,400. Rounding up the figure, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,10,000 specifying t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-29-2002
Reported in : II(2002)DMC435; 2002(4)MPHT84
ORDERSubhash Samvatsar, J.1. This revision is arising out of a matrimonial matter. The revision is filed by the plaintiff/husband, who had filed a petition for dissolution of marriage, filed under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, challenging the order refusing him the permission to examine the respondent from medical expert.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed an application under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act for annulment of marriage. The allegations of the plaintiff are that the petitioner and respondent married on 13-7-1994 at Ummedgarh and came to their residence at Gwalior on 15-7-1994. On that date the petitioner came to know that the respondent was carrying and was pregnant on account of her sexual relations with some third person, therefore, the petitioner did not cohabit with her and there was no physical relation between them. The petitioner immediately on 16-7-94 reported this matter to the father of respondent, who came to Gwalior on 18-7-94 a...
Tag this Judgment!