Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Parmu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Parmu vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 05, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1053722

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Parmu

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

writ petition no ::4635. / 2013 parmu and others versus state of mp and others 05.04.2013. shri o.p.dwivedi for the petitioners.smt. sharda dubey, panel lawyer, for the state. interalia contending that petitioners are owner of a tank situated in khasr.no.141, area 11.252 hectares situated in village partala, tehsil and district jabalpur, the property is their ancestral property and respondents 9 to 17 are interfering with their possession, petitioners have filed a complaint inspite thereof the police authorities are not taking action. this writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the police authorities to take action on the complaint of the petitioners against respondents 9 to 17. according to the averments made in the petition, it is seen that with regard to the dispute in question, civil proceedings are pending in the civil court at jabalpur. as a civil dispute is already pending between the parties, it is not appropriate for this court to interfere in a writ petition and issue direction to the police authorities for initiation of criminal action against the respondents. in case petitioners feel that the respondents have acted in a manner which amounts to commission of a criminal offence, petitioners can very well file a private complaint in a court of competent jurisdiction and the magistrate concerned can take action in the matter. as such a remedy is available to the petitioners.i see no reason to interfere into the matter. accordingly, with the aforesaid observations, the petition stands dismissed. (rajendra menon) judge aks/-

Full Judgment

Writ Petition No ::

4635. / 2013 Parmu and others versus State of MP and others 05.04.2013.

Shri O.P.Dwivedi for the petitioneRs.Smt.

Sharda Dubey, Panel Lawyer, for the State.

Interalia contending that petitioners are owner of a tank situated in KhaSr.No.141, Area 11.252 Hectares situated in Village Partala, Tehsil and District Jabalpur, the property is their ancestral property and respondents 9 to 17 are interfering with their possession, petitioners have filed a complaint inspite thereof the police authorities are not taking action.

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the police authorities to take action on the complaint of the petitioners against respondents 9 to 17.

According to the averments made in the petition, it is seen that with regard to the dispute in question, civil proceedings are pending in the Civil Court at Jabalpur.

As a civil dispute is already pending between the parties, it is not appropriate for this Court to interfere in a writ petition and issue direction to the police authorities for initiation of criminal action against the respondents.

In case petitioners feel that the respondents have acted in a manner which amounts to commission of a criminal offence, petitioners can very well file a private complaint in a Court of competent jurisdiction and the Magistrate concerned can take action in the matter.

As such a remedy is available to the petitioneRs.I see no reason to interfere into the matter.

Accordingly, with the aforesaid observations, the petition stands dismissed.

(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial