Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. Shri Nikhil Tiwari, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Arvind Pandey, Counsel for respondent No.1 to 3. Shri V.S. Shroti, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Vikram Johri, Counsel for respondent No.4. Shri Rahul Jain, Dy. A.G. for respondent No.5. The petitioner has sought following reliefs :-1. "That this Hon. Court may be pleased to call for the entire relevant records.2. That this Hon. Court may be pleased to direct the respondent bank to pay the rent for the month of April,2009 with interest and the bank rate to the petitioner.3. Any other relief which this Hon. Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be issued in favour of petitioner with the cost of the instant petition to the petitioner."2. The petitioner has also challenged order dated 14.9.2009 passed by the First Addl. District Judge, Bhopal in execution Case No.40A-89/04-07 by which the Addl. District Judge declined to make payment of Rs.62,652/- to the petitioner decree holder.3. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The appellant/defendant has directed this appeal under Section 100 of the CPC being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 8.9.2009 passed by 20 t h Additional District Judge , District Jabalpur in regular civil appeal No.27-A/09 affirming the judgment and decree dated 24.2.2009 passed by the 11 t h Civil Judge Class-I, Jabalpur in original civil suit No. 112-A/08, decreeing the suit of the respondent for eviction against the appellant with respect of a shop the non-residential accommodation described in the plaint, situated in Adhartal, Jabalpur.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that respondent herein filed the suit for eviction against the appellant, with respect of the above-mentioned shop situated in Adhartal, Jabalpur, described with all particulars in the plaint and also shown in the annexed map with the plaint, on the ground of arrears of rent under section 12(1)(a) and also on the ground of his bonafide genuine requirement of the disputed accommodation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. This revision applicant under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 19 of the Family Court Act has been filed by the applicant/wife against the order dated 22/10/2009 passed in M.J.C. No.66/2009 by the Presiding Officer, Family Court, Sagar whereby learned Family Court has refused to grant arrears of maintenance amount @ Rs. 5,000/- per month to the applicant for the period commencing from 7/10/2006 to 17/3/2009.2. Brief facts of the case are that against the order dated 7/10/206 passed by Family Court, Sagar in MJC No.39/2006 by which an application for grant of maintenance filed by the applicant under Section 125, Cr.P.C.has been partly allowed and learned Family Court granted maintenance to the applicant at the rate of Rs.5,00/- per month and Rs.300/- as expenses of the proceedings.3. On 11/11/2006 when the matter was listed for hearing on I.a. No.1039/2007, this Court directed that non-applicant shall pay Rs.2,500/- per month to the applicant ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. This revision petition under Section 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the complainant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.11.94, passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in ST No. 378/92 by which the non-applicant nos. 1 and 2 have been acquitted of the charge, punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC, in alternative under Section 304-B of IPC.2. The facts of the case, in short, are that marriage of Abha Sharma (deceased), daughter of the applicant was solemnized on 15.05.1991 with Arvind Sharma (convicted accused). It is undisputed that the non-applicant no. 1, Halki bai is mother and the non-applicant No. 2 Raghunandan is elder brother of Arvind Sharma. It is alleged that after marriage, accused Arvind Sharma along with non-applicant nos. 1 and 2, ill treated Abha Sharma(deceased) regarding dowry and also demanded motor cycle. Since, the applicant was unable to fulfill their demand of dowry therefore, on 11.02.1992 acc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The appellants/defendants, have directed this appeal under section 100 of the CPC, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 31.1.07 passed by Addl. District Judge, Burhanpur in Civil Regular Appeal No.16-A/05, affirming the judgment and decree dated 29.10.05 passed by II Civil Judge Class-II, Burhanpur in Civil Original Suit No.52-A/2001, till the extent of decreeing the suit of the respondents for eviction under section 12(1)(c) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 and dismissing the counter claim of the appellants for damages. While the decree of the trial court given under section 12(1)(a) of the Act has been set aside by the appellate court.2. It is undisputed fact of the case that Plot No.159/2 situated at Block No.36 at Shastri Chowk ward, Burhanpur is a property belonging to appellant No.2 Vidya Bai. While the adjoining plot and premises described in the plaint and also marked as A.B.C.D.F in a map annexed with such plaint, was of the property of the predecesso...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for quashment of order dated 9 th November, 2009 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent no.3/District Magistrate, Bhopal and to quash the order dated 14.12.2009 (Annexure P/3) passed by respondent no.2/State of Madhya Pradesh and to revoke the detention order of his relative Athar S/o Babu Khan-detenu.2. The facts recited in the petition as well as in the return submitted by the respondent no.2/State, in brief, are that the petitioner's relative Athar has been detained by virtue of order dated 9th November, 2009 passed by respondent no.3/District Magistrate Bhopal in exercise of powers conferred by sub section (2) of section 3 of the National Security Act (hereinafter referred to as the `Act' for short). This order was confirmed by the order dated 14.12.2009 (Annexure P/3) passed by respondent no.2/State Government in exercise of powers confirmed under Section 12(1) of the Act after receiving th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The appellant- defendant no.1 has preferred this appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 30.8.08 passed by IIst Additional District Judge, Chhatarpur in Civil Appeal No. 7-A/08 affirming the judgment and decree dated 20.11.06 passed by IInd Civil Judge, Class-II, Chhatapur in C.O.S. No. 21-A/2004 decreeing the suit of the respondent against him for specific performance with respect of landed property bearing survey no. 2684, area 0.85 acre, Survey no. 2689, areas 1.00 acre and survey no. 2690, area 1.07 hectare, total 2.92 hectares, situated at village Garloli, Patwari Halka no. 17, Tahsil Lanogaon, district Chhatarpur.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that respondent no. 1 herein filed the suit for specific performance against the appellant contending that the appellant entered with him an agreement dated 13.1.04 to sell the above mentioned landed property to him in consideration of Rs.45,000/-, out...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa vide impugned judgment dated 16.11.95, in ST No. 87/95 recording conviction of appellants/accused under Section 25(1B)(a) of Arms Act, sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00/- each with default stipulation.2. Being aggrieved, appellants/accused have preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.3. It is undisputed that the appellants were prosecuted and tried for murder of Shyamlal under Section 302 of IPC along with the offence under Section 25(1B)(a) of Arms Act but they have been acquitted of the charge under Section 302 of IPC.4. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 19.1.95 at about 10 O' clock in the morning deceased Shyamlal went with appellants/accused persons but he did not return back. On 21.1.95 a dead body of unknown person was found near the Durman Gupha of village Duari which was identified as dead body of Shyamlal. Dead body was sent for post-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1/ First Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad, vide impugned judgment dated 2.11.1995 passed in Sessions Trial No. 22 of 1994 by which the appellant no.1 Basant Kumar was convicted for offence punishable under Section 304-B and 498-A of the I.P.C and sentenced him to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and appellant no.2 Smt. Prem Bai was convicted under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. and sentenced her to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default, she has to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months.2/ Being aggrieved appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.3/ It is undisputed that appellant, Basant Kumar was under trial prisoner since 23.8.1993 to 2.11.1995 (date of judgment), his sentence has not been suspended. Therefore, he completed his period of 7 years imprisonment on 22.8.2000. According to learned counsel for the appellant, Basant Kumar has been released from jail. In thes...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. The appellant/defendant has directed this appeal under Section 100 of the CPC being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 18.1.2010 passed by Ist Additional District Judge Khurai, District Sagar in regular civil appeal no.43-A/08 whereby, the judgment and decree dated 15.9.09 passed by Ist Civil Judge Class-I Khurai in original civil suit No. 135-A/06, decreeing the suit of the respondents for eviction against the appellant on the grounds enumerated under Section 12(1)(a),(c)and (e) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (In short 'the Act') have been affirmed while the same was set aside with respect of the ground of Section 12 (1) (o) of the Act.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that one Dwarka Prasad the predecessor in title of respondents No.1 to 4 and respondent no.5 filed the eviction suit against the appellant contending that the appellant being their tenant at the rate of Rs.160/- per month, is in occupation of the disputed premises situated at S...
Tag this Judgment!