Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: madhya pradesh Year: 1998 Page 1 of about 51 results (0.058 seconds)

Sep 01 1998 (HC)

B.R. Nikunj Vs. VipIn Tiwari

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-01-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ4223

..... from which he derives status and sustenance but does greater general damage by shaking faith of the devotees and hurting the feelings and sentiments of the worshippers who through his mediation and assistance seek spiritual gain and contentment.2. these introductory comments are called for on the facts which have been brought to the notice of this court by a reference .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1998 (HC)

Smt. Kanta Sachdev Vs. Devidas

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-05-1998

Reported in : II(1998)DMC368

..... malkani dw 2. the wife has also examined one ballumal pw 3 to prove that as vice president of the sindhi panchayat consisting of members of the community he had mediated for reconciliation between the parties and according to him their differences could not be patched up as the husband has re- married.5. the case set up by the husband .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 07 1998 (HC)

Shyamlal (Deceased by Lr) Vs. State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-07-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ3782

v.k. agrawal, j.1. the accused/appellant stands convicted under section 161 of the ipc & under section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the act for short) for committing criminal misconduct by having demanded and accepted illegal gratification of rs. 500/-from complainant umesh kumar pandey and sentenced to r.i. for 1 year on each of the above counts and also to pay fine of rs. 100/- under section 5(2) of the act, by judgment dated 17th june, 1988 in spl. cr. case no. 14/1986 by special judge & i additional sessions judge, rewa.2. the accused/appellant was a patwari at the relevant time and posted at boda-bagh, rewa and thus a public servant. indisputably, the complainant umesh kumar pandey (p.w. 1) had purchased agricultural land by registered-deed, copy of which is ex. p/l, from one sukhwati and had submitted an application before the appellant shyamlal for mutation of his name on the said land.3. the prosecution case is that the accused/ appellant shyamlal, for initiating action for the mutation of the name of complainant umesh kumar pandey (p.w. 1), had demanded rs. 2,000/- and since the complainant umesh kumar pandey did not want to pay him the amount, he approached the s.d.o., tahsil: huzur, district rewa and submitted an application (ex. p/2) for issuing necessary directions to the accused/appellant for taking action for mutation. the s.d.o. endorsed the application, directing the accused/appellant to immediately issue rin .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 07 1998 (HC)

Shyamlal Since Deceased Through His L.R. Arun Kumar Pandey Vs. State o ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-07-1998

Reported in : 1999(1)MPLJ527

v.k. agrawal, j.1. the accused/appellant stands convicted under section 161 of the indian penal code and under section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the act for short) for committing criminal misconduct by having demanded and accepted illegal gratification of rs. 500/- from complainant umesh kumar pandey and sentenced to r.i. for 1 year on each of the above counts and also to pay fine of rs. 100/- under section 5(2) of the act, by judgment dated 17th june, 1988 in spl. cr. case no. 14/1986 by special judge and 1 additional sessions judge, rewa.2. the accused/appellant was a patwari at the relevant time and posted at boda-bagh, rewa and thus a public servant. undisputably, the complainant umesh kumar pandey (p.w.1) had purchased agricultural land by registered deed, copy of which is ex.p/1, from one sukhwati and had submitted an application before the appellant shyamlal for mutation of his name on the said land.3. the prosecution case is that the accused/appellant shyamlal, for initiating action for the mutation of the name of complainant umesh kumar pandey (p.w.i), had demanded rs. 2,000/- and since the complainant umesh kumar pandey did not want to pay him the amount, he approached the s.d.o., tahsil : huzur, district rewa and submitted an application (ex.p/2) for issuing necessary directions to the accused/appellant for taking action for mutation. the s.d.o. endorsed the application, directing the accused/appellant to immediately .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 1998 (HC)

Deepa @ Deepchand and anr. Vs. State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-06-1998

Reported in : 1998(1)MPLJ412

d.p.s. chauhan, j.1. the appeal is at the behest of deepa @ deepchand and bego bai @ faggo bai, who were convicted in s. t no. 18/87, vide judgment and order dated 12-2-1988, whereby appellant no. 1 deepa @ deepchand was convicted for commission of the offence punishable under section 302, of the indian penal code, and was sentenced to imprisonment for life, whereas appellant no. 2 bego bai @ faggo bai was convicted under section 302 with the aid of section 34 of the indian penal code, and was sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. the brief facts of the case are that there was dispute between the accused persons and basodi in relation to the land comprising in khasra no. 21/3, measuring 8.607 hectare, situated in village kachhari, p. s. keolari, tehsil and district seoni. basodi lal claims to have received this land from the maternal grand mother late batto bai, whereas on the basis of sale deed (ex. d/5) jeevanlal, the father of deepa @ deepchand and his mother bego bai wanted to have possession over this land. on 18-9-1986, in the morning accused deepa @ deepchand and his mother bego bai reached the field which is called talab bali jheel. on getting information about it from sunita bai (pw/10), deceased jambati accompanied with her daughter sona bai (pw/8) went to the field for stopping the accused persons from cultivating the land and sowing the seeds. jambati bai on reaching the field stopped deepa @ deepchand from ploughing and sowing the field wherein an altercation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 1998 (HC)

Deepa Alias Deepchand and anr. Vs. State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-06-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ413

d.p.s. chauhan, j.1. the appeal is at the behest of deepa alias deepchand and bego bai alias faggo bai, who were convicted in s.t. no. 18/87, vide judgment and order dated 12-2-88, whereby appellant no. 1 deepa alias deepchand was convicted for commission of the offence punishable under section 302, of the ipc, and was sentenced to imprisonment for life, whereas appellant no. 2 bego bai alias faggo bai was convicted under section 302 with the aid of section 34, of the ipc, and was sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. the brief facts of the case are that there was dispute between the accused persons and basodi in relation to the land comprising in khasra no. 21/3, measuring 8.607 hectare situated in village kachhari, p.s. keolari, tensil and district seoni. basodi lal claims to have received this land from the maternal grand-mother late batto bai, whereas on the basis of sale deed (ex.d/5) jeevanlal, the father of deepa alias deepchand and his mother bego bai wanted to have possession over this land. on 18 9-86, in the morning accused deepa alias deepchand and his mother bego bai reached the field which is called talab bali jheel. on getting information about it from sunita bai (pw/10), deceased jarnbati accompanied with her daughter sona bai (pw/8) went to the field for stopping the accused persons from cultivating the land and sowing the seeds. jambati bai on reaching the field stopped deepa alias deepchand from ploughing and sowing the field wherein an altercation took .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 09 1998 (HC)

Shivdevi and ors. Vs. Surja Devi and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-09-1998

Reported in : 1999(1)MPLJ583

s.p. srivastava, j.1. heard the learned counsel for the appellants who are the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased sole plaintiff, ramlakhan.2. perused the record.3. the appellants feel aggrieved by the decree passed by the first appellate court whereunder dismissing their appeal, the decree passed by the trial court dismissing the plaintiffs suit has been upheld.4. ramlakhan, the predecessor-in-interest of the present appellants had filed the suit giving rise to this appeal seeking a declaration that he be declared to be the heir of shivnarayan, deceased on the basis of the 'will' dated 10-6-1975, executed by him in his favour. he also prayed for a direction for the recording of his name in the revenue records as bhumiswami of the agricultural holdings in dispute cancelling the orders passed by the revenue authorities including the board of revenue. a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction was also claimed against the defendants restraining them from interfering in the ownership and possession of the plaintiff over the land in suit.5. the plaintiff had come up with the case that shivnarayan was the bhumiswami in possession of the agricultural holdings in dispute who had died on 20-7-1975. in paragraph 2 of the plaint, it was asserted that shivnarayan was not married and had no issue or any heir. in paragraph 3 of the plaint, it had been asserted that the plaintiff was a khandani brother of shivnarayan who had no najadiki waris and shivnarayan had great love .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 1998 (HC)

Mangala Ben Vs. Dilip Motwani and anr.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-27-1998

Reported in : I(1998)ACC667; 2000ACJ1388

shambhoo singh, j. 1. this appeal has been filed by the claimant mangala ben, the mother of the deceased hansmukh manilal being aggrieved of the award dated 7.11.1997 passed by commissioner, workmen's compensation, indore, in claim case no. 45 of 1996 whereby the application for compensation was dismissed.2. the case of the applicant, in brief, was that her son hansmukh manilal was an employee of non-applicant-respondent dilip motwani and was earning rs. 2,000 as pay and rs. 1,500 as allowance per month. on 17.11.1996 during the course of his employment, he was coming from bombay to indore driving maruti car no. mp 09 ha 4744 on national highway, when he came near chandwad police station, truck no. wb 03 6075 came from front side at high speed rashly and negligently and dashed against the car, as a result of which hansmukh died on the spot. the claimant mother filed claim petition under section 20 of the workmen's compensation act, 1923 (for short 'the act') and claimed rs. 2,15,000 as compensation with interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum. the respondent-non-applicant dilip motwani remained absent and was proceeded exparte. the respondent insurance company filed written statement in oppugnation. it challenged the jurisdiction of the commissioner and pleaded that the deceased was not the employee of non-applicant, owner dilip motwani who had mentioned in his o.d. claim that the deceased hansmukh manilal was not his employee, he was his friend. the learned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 16 1998 (HC)

Chandi Bai W/O Lallaram Vishwakarma Vs. Gulabkali W/O Heerendra Singh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-16-1998

Reported in : 1999(1)MPLJ629

ordera.k. mathur, c.j.1. this is a letters patent appeal directed against the judgment dated 9-5-1997 in w. p. no. 5097 of 1996 whereby the learned single judge has allowed the petition and set aside the resolution dated 30-11-1996 recorded by the nagar panchayat carrying out the motion of no confidence against the petitioner/respondent.2. brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the petitioner/respondent filed a writ petition seeking quashing of proceedings dated 30-11-1996 (ex.pl) by which a motion of no confidence was passed against her. it was also prayed that the proceedings dated 30-11-1996 be declared as null and void. the petitioner/respondent was elected as a sarpanch of nagar panchayat semaria. some members of the council moved a no confidence motion against the petitioner/respondent. meeting of no confidence was to be held on 18-11-1996 as per the agenda dated 5-11-1996 issued by the respondent no. 2. the meeting could not be convened on 18th november, 1996 but it was convened on 19-11-1996. as the chief municipal officer was not available, it was adjourned to 30-11-1996. the meeting was held on 30-11-1996 and motion of no confidence was passed against the petitioner/respondent. the petitioner challenged this motion of no confidence on the ground that the meeting which was convened was in violation of the provisions of sections 47, 52 and 59 of the m.p. municipalities act, 1961 (for short the act). the main contention of the petitioner/ .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1998 (HC)

Narayandas Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-06-1998

Reported in : AIR1999MP197

orderdipak misra, j.1. invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under a. 226 of the constitution of india the petitioner has prayed for issue of appropriate writ to declare the proceedings of the meeting of nagar panchayat, nasrullganj held on 24-9-97 vide annexure-p-1 as illegal and further to issue a writ prohibiting the president of the said nagar panchayat to function as such.2. the essential facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner was elected as councillor from ward no. 8 of the nagar panchayat, nasrullaganj, and thereafter, he was elected as the vice president of the said nagar panchayat. it is stated that he had been working in the interest of public and from time to time was exposing the misdeeds in the corporation which had caused annoyance to the president and a limited number of members who contrived a situation to bring a no confidence motion against him. it is putforth that the president, respondent no. 3 herein, does not have the credentials to function as the president but is still continuing in the post. it is pleaded that the petitioner received a notice dated 6-9-97 purported to have been signed by sub-divisional officer, nasrullaganj indicating that he had been nominated as the authority to convene the meeting and preside over it for the purpose of no confidence motion against the petitioner as envisaged under section 43-a of the m.p. municipalities act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). the date of meeting .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //