Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1- Heard on I.A.No.13001/2008, an application for vacating the stay granted by this Court on 30.10.2008.2- This is an appeal filed by appellant M/s Birla Ericsson Optical Limited, Shri Harshvardhan Lodha, Shri Ramesh Chandra Tapuriah alongwith Shri Dhan Raj Bansal under section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956 and challenge in this appeal is made to an interlocutory order-dated 15.10.2008 passed by the Company Law Board in Company Application No.533/2008, filed in Company Petition No.35/2005, which is still pending.3- Company Petition No.35/2005 is filed by M/s Vindhya Telelinks Limited against various respondents, including respondent No.1 herein i.e M/s Rameshwara Jute Mills Co. Limited, and the present appellants in the matter of proceedings under sections 397, 398 read with 402, 403, 406 and 408 of the Companies Act. 4- It is seen from the records that in the pending Company Petition bearing No.35/2005, respondent No.22 namely M/s Rameshwar Jute Mills Co. Ltd (respondent No.1 in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1- Challenging the order-dated 14.1.1997 Annexure P/7 passed by the Disciplinary Authority respondent No.2, imposing penalty of removal from service and the order-dated 30.3.1998 Annexure P/8, passed by the appellate authority dismissing the appeal filed by him, petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2- Facts, in nutshell, indicate that petitioner was initially appointed as a peon. He was thereafter promoted on the post of Driver and his promotion was subject to the condition that his service on the promoted post of Driver should be satisfactory. However, as his work on the promoted post of Driver was not found satisfactory, vide order Annexure P/1 he was reverted to the post of peon and while so working as a peon petitioner was transferred from the office of District and Sessions Judge, Mandleshwar to the Civil Court at Bheekagaon. After having been relieved petitioner joined at Bheekagaon on 15.6.1996. Thereafter, he sought earned leave for the period 16.7.1996 to 16.8.1996. Howeve...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The appellant no.2 has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 27.8.1996, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Umaria, District Shahdol in S.T. No.141/1993, by which he was convicted for offence punishable under Section 411 of I.P.C. and inflicted with the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs.5000/-; The appellant no.2 was to undergo for a further period of one year rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine.2. It is admitted that due to death of appellant no.1 Vinod Kumar Dubey, appeal filed by appellant no.1 is dismissed being abated.3. The prosecution story in short is that, in the midnight of 19th-20th March, 1993 the appellants went inside the house of one Sonia Bai to commit robbery. It was know to everyone that Sonia Bai was in habit of wearing silver and golden ornaments in bulk. After entering in the house they committed murder of Sonia Bai by throttling and took various ornaments from her house and person and left away...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 16.8.2010, passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T. No.208/2009, by which he was convicted for offence punishable under Section 392 of I.P.C. and inflicted with the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs.1000/-; in default of payment of fine he was to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. The prosecution story in short is that, on 23.11.2008 the complainant Shashi Jain had visited Jain Temple at Shiv Nagar with her daughter Rekha Jain. At about 6.30 p.m when she was returning back from the temple to her house situated at Hanumantal, someone snatched her golden chain from her neck. Chain was snatched by three persons riding on a motor cycle. The complainant lodged an FIR in Police Station, Gohalpur. After due investigation, police had arrested the appellant and recovered a golden chain from him. The appellant was duly identified by the complainant in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the order dated 12-2-2002 passed by the Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior in Revision No. 1691-Ek/2001, setting aside the order dated 29-8-2001, passed by the Commissioner, Rewa Division, Rewa, in Appeal No. 236/Rev/2000-2001, arising out of orders dated 4-4-2001 and 25-4-2001 passed by the Collector. Satna, in Case No. 33-A-19/Suo Motu Revision/94-96,.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that one Smt. Sona Bai, widow of Shri Sarju Sharan was granted a permanent lease of a total area of 41.82 acres comprising of Aaraji Nos. 214, 215, 256, 257, 258, 288, 290 and 292 by a deed, dated 19-4-1949. The said Smt. Sona Bai executed a lease deed in favour of one Arjun Das, father of the petitioner, in respect of Khasra No. 292, area 5.40 acres ( This Khasra Number was subsequently changed to 292/1 ). Subsequently, some time in the year 1982 after death of Smt. Sona Bai her three daughters execut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1- As common questions are involved in all these writ petitions and as the question involved stands decided by various orders passed by the Indore Bench of this Court on 11.10.2010, all these petitions are being heard and decided by this common order. For the sake convenience, documents and pleadings of the parties available in the record of W.P.No.6906/2010 Indra Kumar Borban and another v. State of MP and others, is referred to in this order. 2- Petitioners in all these cases were candidates, who had participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of Patwari. After submitting their candidature, petitioners' claim were rejected by the Dy. Commissioner, Land Revenue by the impugned action/orders and the Collectors of each and every district were directed to cancel the candidature of the petitioners on the ground that the certificates, namely, the Diploma Certificates or the Degree Certificates with regard to passing the Computer Application Examination, in the case...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. Petitioner has sought for following reliefs:- " a) Appropriate writ striking down Section 53 of the M.P. Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994 as ultra-vires the Constitution of Indiab) Certiorari, quashing order, dated 15.5.2007 Annexure P/5 passed by the respondent No.3. c) Any other order or orders that this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be kindly granted."2. In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the constitutional validity of Section 53 of the M.P. Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Adhiniyam'). For ready reference, section 53 of the Adhiniyam is reproduced which reads thus:- "53. Tax to be first charge.3. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in force and subject to the provisions of Section 530 of the Companies Act, 1956 (No.1 of 1956) any amount of tax, and/or penalty or interest, if any, payable by a dealer or other person under this Act shall be first charge...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. Appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment dated 12.10.2000 delivered by Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Sidhi in Sessions Trial No. 62/88, convicting the appellants under Section 302/34 IPC for imprisonment of life and under Section 498-A/34 IPC for imprisonment of two years' R.I. and fine of Rs.500/- each, in default of payment of fine, appellants to undergo further R.I.for six months.2. Undisputedly, appellant no.1 Urmila Prasad Pandey is the father-in-law, appellant no.2 Anup Kumar is the husband and appellant no.3 Smt. Shyama Bai Pandey is the mother-in-law of deceased Geeta Pandey who died an unnatural death within seven years of her marriage. It is also not disputed that Gita Pandey died in her Sasural (house of appellants).3. Facts, as alleged by the prosecution, are that Gita Pandey, deceased was married to appellant no.2 Anup Kumar near about five years back. After marriage she used to reside with the appellants in Village-Padkhuri, PS-Rampur Nekin, District-Sidhi. A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 8.4.2010 in Writ Petition No.3717/10(s) by which learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner. Facts of the case are that petitioner was a candidate in the Patwari selection process but his candidature was rejected on the ground that Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application obtained by the petitioner was conferred by the Rajiv Gandhi Saksharta Mission, an institute affiliated to the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya was not approved by the Government. It was argued before the learned Single Judge that the certificate issued by the institute was recognized for appearing in the examination. It was also argued before the learned Single Judge that the minimum qualification prescribed is Higher Secondary pass with 10+2 pattern and qualification of Diploma in Computer Application or Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application is only an additional and not an essential qualification.2....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. Since all the aforesaid cases arise out of the common impugned judgment, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. Accused persons viz. Bhagirath Jatav and Manish have been convicted by judgment dated 8.12.2009 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal (Shri Shailendra Shukla) in Sessions Trial No. 240/2009 under Sections 364-A read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Accused Madan has been convicted under Section 368 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years with fine of Rs. 1,000/-. All these three accused persons have also been convicted under Section 386 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs. 2,000/-. All the aforesaid jail sentences have been directed to run concurrent.3. A letter of request has been received by th...
Tag this Judgment!