Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: madhya pradesh Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 61 results (0.072 seconds)

Jul 22 2003 (HC)

Sunil Sehgal Vs. Chhaya Sehgal

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-22-2003

Reported in : II(2004)DMC755

..... the girls and used to receive telephone calls from them. even if it is assumed that parents of appellant or even s.p. azad mediated between the young couple on their mutual quarrels in the beginning of marital life, it does not go to prove that the respondent is ..... extra marital alliance. thus, this claim of the appellant has been false. s.p. azad, audit officer has not been examined to prove the mediation of november, 1989. parents of appellant have not been examined to prove that the respondent misbehaved with them. certainly the house was purchased from the ..... as she suspected the character of the appellant has been denied. on 3.6.1995 the appellant had misbehaved and assaulted the respondent and on mediation of sister and brother of the respondent he became furious and left the house with his clothes, goods and v.c.p. the respondent ..... and parents of respondent approached the parents of appellant who mediated and pacified the respondent.(d) respondent refused to cohabit and have sexual intercourse with her since august, 1990 and started sleeping in the separate room ..... give money for household expenses and does not cooperate in household work which caused mental agony to the appellant. s.p. azad and audit officer mediated between the parties.(c) in first week of august, 1990 respondent again quarrelled with the appellant and alleged unchastity and vagrancy. both the brothers .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 2003 (HC)

Mohammad Asif Vs. State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-25-2003

Reported in : 2003(4)MPHT343

awasthy, j.1. the appellant has preferred this appeal against judgment dated 11-5-1990 passed by ivth additional sessions judge, bhopal in sessions trial no. 32 of 1989 against his conviction under section 302 of the indian penal code and sentence of life imprisonment.2. the prosecution case is that on 28-9-1988 at about 1.35 p.m. at kabitpura, bhopal, deceased irfan had scuffle with the appellant and the appellant took out the knife and gave blow on the chest of irfan. that irfan ran towards his house and he was chased by the accused. when the deceased reached his house the accused went away saying that he will not leave him to go to the hospital. eye witnesses of the offence are mother of deceased khalikulnisha (p.w. 5), her daughter-in-law kiswar jahan (p.w. 4) and her son taufique (p.w. 9). kiswar jahan (p.w. 4) rushed to the police station, shahjahanabad and first information report (ex. p-7) was recorded on that very day at about 1.51 p.m. by assistant sub-inspector r.n. mishra (p.w. 8). irfan was declared dead in the hospital and post-mortem of the dead body was conducted by dr. j.n. soni (p.w. 2). dr. j.n. soni (p.w. 2) has found that in the left side of the chest of deceased, there was an incised wound which had cut the lungs and the cause of the death was the shock and haemorrhage due to the injury. investigating officer kuber singh rajput (p.w. 11) took the recovery statement (ex. p-2) of the appellant on 29-9-1988 and a knife was recovered on his instance from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 14 2003 (HC)

Sardar Gurucharan Singh Vs. Mahendra Singh and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-14-2003

Reported in : 2004(2)MPHT437; 2004(1)MPLJ252

..... is to be drawn against the plaintiff as per section 114(g) of the evidence act and (e) from the evidence of jagdish singh saini (p. w. 2) who was mediator between the vendor and the vendee, it is found that the vendor even did not know the vendee and the signatures of both of them were obtained on this agreement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 09 2003 (HC)

Ambika Prasad Bakshi and anr. Vs. Onkar Prasad Saini and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-09-2003

Reported in : AIR2005MP60

s.l. jain, j.1. being aggrieved by the order dated march 20, 2003, passed by the learned single judge, in writ petition no. 5498/2000, appellants have filed this letters patent appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent.2. the brief resume of the facts required to be stated for disposal of this appeal is as follows :--a civil suit no. 76-a/61 was filed in the court of civil judge class ii, sagar by babu gokul prasad as plaintiff against the defendants laxman and jairam, alleging that he purchased the suit-land bearing khasra no. 503, area 5 acres, situate at moza sagar khas, tahsil and district sagar, from babu shiv prasad and babu kashi prasad on 30-11-1958. the defendants entered into illegal possession of the said land. they neither paid the damages nor delivered possession of the suit-land in spite of notice by the plaintiff.3. the defendants pleaded that the sale-deed in favour of the plaintiff dated 3-11-1958 is a fictitious and sham transaction which was not meant to be acted upon. it was only a collusive transaction. gokul prasad, having lost the civil suit preferred civil appeal no. 68-a/64 which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 9-9-1965 and thereby the judgment and decree of the trial court was confirmed.4. the plaintiff/appellants babu gokul prasad preferred a second appeal no. 1034/85 in the high court of m.p. at jabalpur. during the pendency of the appeal, laxman, the defendant/respondent no. 1 died and his legal representatives were brought on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 2003 (HC)

State of M.P. and ors. Vs. Gautam Nagar Housing Society

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-04-2003

Reported in : 2004(1)MPHT493

orderkumar rajaratnam, c.j.1. the appellants being aggrieved by the order of the learned single judge dated 8-9-1998, in writ petition no. 1453/95 (gautam nagar housing society v. state of m.p. and ors.), have preferred this letters patent appeal.2. the short question that arose before the learned single judge was whether the town & country planning authority has got the power to require the developer to surrender the land to the extent of 15% of the area, for which development was sought tor by a developer for informal sector. the learned single judge held that the condition of surrender of 15% of the land for the purpose of informal sector is contrary to law without payment of just compensation.3. the facts briefly are that the respondent is a housing society. it has 187 members belonging to service class and weaker section of the society. the respondent-housing society applied for exemption under section 20 of the urban land (ceiling & regulations) act, 1976, which was granted to him subject to certain conditions therein.4. the respondent-housing society purchased 2.50 acres of land and applied for diversion and mutation under the relevant provisions of the m.p. land revenue code, 1959. the respondent submitted lay out plan to the town & country planning department. an application was also made for grant of licence under section 24 of the m.p. vinirdisth bhrast acharan nivaran adhiniyam, 1982, and the society wanted to divide the land into plots.5. when the respondent- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 02 2003 (HC)

Manik Lal and ors. Vs. Rajaram and anr.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-02-2003

Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT29

k.k. lahoti, j.1. defendants aggrieved by judgment and decree passed by lower appellate court by which reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court, suit of respondents/plaintiffs was decreed, have filed this second appeal. 2. short facts are that, both the parties are closely related. genealogical tree showing their relationship is as under :-- puhkar | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | | | | | bhagwat rabuda galau khuman mutkai tidka (d-1925) (d-1946) (d-1932) (d-1947) (d-1948) (d-issueless) | | | | | | | | | | --------------------- | | | | | | | =budia =|chhutuwadi |@ mohan samanua @mahraiwali |mahroiwali | (d-1967) | | | = sudhia | ------------------------------- | | | | | natthoolal | bhassu @ | | dharamdas (d-6) | | | ----------------------------------- | | | | | manik sundar sukhlal | (d-1) (d-2) | ----------------------------------- | | | | jamuna girdhari daduli jhulli (d-4) (d-5) (pre-d. puhar) (d-3) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | | | mirra sudama chhanga manga budhua sudhua madhua fadali | | | | bhura | (d-7) | -------------------------- | |rajaram laxminath(plf-1) (plf-2)3. suit was filed by rajaram and laxminath on the ground that plaintiffs are co-owner and joint-holder of agricultural lands, particulars of which are given in para 1 of the plaint. defendants are related to each other and are residents of .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 13 2003 (HC)

Rajiv Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-13-2003

Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT225

orderrajenra menon, j.1. petitioner, an elected president of municipal council, ambah district morena, has called in question tenability of an order dated 12-12-2002, passed by the state government vide annexure p/4-a, removing him from the post of president, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 41 (a) of the madhya pradesh municipalities act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the act of 1961).2. according to the petitioner, he was elected to the municipal council (hereinafter referred to as the council) in the election held on 26-12-1999, result thereof was declared on 28-12-1999, certificate, annexure p-1 is the declaration under the relevant statutory rule declaring him to be elected as president of the council.3. it is the case of petitioner that even though he was discharging his duties effectively and in accordance with law, but certain persons were personally annoyed with him, therefore, complaints were made to respondent no. 1 who by letter dated 17-7-2001, annexure p-2 raised certain quarries from respondent no. 3 in connection with the alleged irregularities. it is averred by the petitioner that in response to the aforesaid quarries, the deputy director, urban administration and development, gwalior, vide annexure p-3, dated 10-8-2001, had clarified the position. thereafter, a show-cause notice dated 24-12-2001, annexure p-4 was issued under the provisions of section 41-a of the act of 1961, making various allegations against the petitioner. it is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 2003 (HC)

Vijay Bhadur and Champalal Vs. Surendra Kumar

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-21-2003

Reported in : AIR2003MP117; 2003(2)MPLJ86

a.k. shrivastava, j.1. feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 28-9-1995 passed by learned xith, additional judge to the court of district judge, indore in civil suit no. 78-a/90 decreeing the suit of plaintiff for specific performance of contract, the defendants/appellants have preferred this appeal.2. the facts shorn on unnecessary details lie in a narrow compass. in brief the case of plaintiff is that, he is the tenant in the house bearing municipal no. 268 (new no. 381), situated at m.g. road, indore, the owner of which is appellant vijay bahadur (hereinafter referred to as the appellant no. 1).3. the appellant no. 1 agreed to sell his house to the plaintiff for a consideration of rs. 40,000/- (rupees forty thousand only) and executed a document of agreement of sale (ex. p/1) on 6-12-1988 and received rs. 15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand only) as an advance money from the plaintiff/respondent. it was agreed between the parties in the said agreement that appellant no. 1 would get his name mutated in the municipal record of the disputed house within a period of six months and thereafter, would receive the balance of sale price rs. 25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) and execute the sale-deed in favour of the plaintiff. according to the plaintiff, the appellant no. 2 had knowledge about the execution of the document of agreement of sale (ex. p/1). it has been contended by the plaintiff that he always remain ready and willing to get the sale-deed executed .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 16 2003 (HC)

Dilip Kumar Goushalawale and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-16-2003

Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT217; 2003(1)MPLJ504

dipak misra, j.1. invoking the jurisdiction of this court under clause 10 of the letters patent, the appellants, five in number, have called in question the defensibility of the order dated 31-7-2002 passed by the learned single judge in w.p. no. 3330/99 = 2002(4) m.p.h.t. 514 and penetrability of the order dated 25-2-2002 passed in m.c.c. no. 1071 of 2002.2. the facts which are necessitous to be adumbrated are the appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners') preferred the aforesaid writ petition to direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted under section 48 of the land acquisition act, 1894 (for brevity 'the act') and further to quash the notifications issued under section 4(1) read with section 17(1) and notification issued under section 6 of the act and the award passed under section 11 of the act. the said documents were brought on record as annexures p-10 to p-11. apart from that there was prayer for quashment of annexures p-27 and p-28. it is relevant to state here that by annexures p-27 and p-28 there has been refusal by the state government to withdraw from the acquisition of the land.3. according to the writ petitioners, a notice under section 4(1) read with section 17(1) of the act was issued on 15-12-1988 invoking urgency clause. notification under section 6 of the act was issued on 5-5-1989 and published in m.p. gazette on 29-5-1989. an award was passed by the land acquisition officer, bhopal on 23-5-1991. initially the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2003 (HC)

Vikas Gupta and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-06-2003

Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT330

orderarun mishra, j.1. petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for writ of certiorari to quash the orders (annexures-d, i, j, k and l) and from prohibiting the respondents from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of petitioners or acquiring the same.2. it is averred in the petition that the petitioners are father and son and petitioner no. 2 carried on business of refractories. petitioner no. 1 vikas gupta purchased a piece of land, area 1.307 hectares out of khasra no. 528, area 1.388 hectares situate in mouza jhinjhari, tehsil murwara, district jabalpur, vide registered sale-deed (annexure-a), dated 27-6-80 for a consideration of rs. 11,500/- from punaua and others, who delivered possession of the said land to him. he is in peaceful possession of the said land since then in bhumiswami rights. mutation was made in khasra (annexure b).3. it is further averred that the state government allotted an area of 8 acres for building a sub-jail in mouza jhinjhari, over survey no. 812, which is situate at a distance of about 200 meters off the land of petitioner no. 1. lay out plan of sub-jail was prepared and existence of private land was clearly shown. petitioner no. 1 started building activity by raising boundary walls all around the area. notice annexure-d, dated 15-2-1989 was received from additional collector, katni to stop the construction on the ground that they had encroached over survey no. 812, area 6.25 acres, which was the land allotted for the construction .....

Tag this Judgment!

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