Chhattisgarh Court May 2015 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Bhuneshwar Prasad Yadav Vs. Badridhar Diwan
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-15-2015
1. The order shall govern the disposal of I.A. No.3, which is an application under Order 7 Rule 11 (a) and (d) of C.P.C. read with Section 86 (1) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (herein after referred to as 'the Act of 1951'), filed by the respondent, the returned candidate. 2. The election petition is preferred challenging the election of respondent, Badridhar Diwan on the ground that the respondent, Badridhar Diwan, who was elected candidate from 31 Beltara Legislative Constituency in the election held in the year 2013 was disqualified to contest the election under Article 191 of Constitution of India. The prayer made in the petition is as under :- It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and setaside the election of the respondent on account of his disqualification under Article 191 of the Constitution of India, in the interest of justice. 3. The petitioner lost the election and respondent was declared as returned candi...
Om Prakash Agarwal and Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, through the ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-15-2015
CAV Order: 1. Petitioners have preferred these writ petitions challenging the common impugned order dated 12-1-2012 passed by the Revisional Authority i.e. Union of India dismissing their revision applications to affirm the order dated 4-2-2010 passed by the State of Chhattisgarh rejecting their applications for grant of prospecting licence and allowing the application of the respondent - Godawari Power Project and Ispat Limited (for short 'the Godawari') grant of mining lease of iron ore over an area admeasuring 32.360 hectares comprising in forest compartment No.139 (new forest compartment No.608), village Kachche, forest range and forest division Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar, Kanker. 2. Since both the writ petitions have thrown challenge to the same order and the application for grant of prospecting licence preferred by each of the petitioner was part of the same larger area, both the writ petitions are considered and disposed of by this common order. 3. Facts of the case, ...
Urvashi Bai Sharma and Another Vs. Indumati Sharma and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-15-2015
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 11.02.2014 passed in Civil Suit No.21-A/2012 by the learned Additional District Judge, Mungeli, wherein, the Court of Additional District Judge has ordered for return of the plaint on the ground that the valuation of jurisdiction of Rs. 12 Lacs has not been properly explained and held that on calculating the land revenue of the disputed property i.e. 20 times of the land revenue, it comes to Rs.96/- which is less than paid Court fees of Rs.500/- each for declaration and injunction. Consequently, the Court has held that the Court of Additional District Judge does not have jurisdiction to entertain the suit and has ordered for return the suit to file in the proper Court of Civil Judge. 2. The relevant facts and averments in the plaint are that a suit is filed by one Smt. Urvashi Bai Sharma, widow of Ishwar Prasad and Ashok Sharma against Smt. Indumati Sharma, Ramadhar Sharma, Ramsahay Sharma and Parmeshwar Sharma. The plaintiffs and defen...
Nand Kumar Sahu Vs. Satyanarayan Sharma
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-12-2015
1. The order shall govern the disposal of I.A. No.3, which is an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C., wherein the respondent has challenged the tenability of the election petition and raised the preliminary objection. 2. The written statements though have been filed on 25.06.2014 prior to that, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. was preferred to challenge the maintainability of the petition. Subsequent there to by an order dated 25.04.2014, the Court had directed for hearing of the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C., pursuant there to, it has come up for hearing to adjudicate on maintainability of the petition as to whether cause of action arises for all the grounds pleaded in election petition. 3. Application under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. is preferred by the respondent No.1, the returned candidate. Perusal of the election petition would show that initially 16 parties were added as a respondents, but subsequently, all the names have been deleted except re...
M/s. Mile Stone Soft. Tech. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Nidhi Chhibber
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: May-08-2015
1. Invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short, the Act, 1971), this contempt petition has been filed by the contempt petitioner herein alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 23.09.2014 passed by Division Bench of this Court in WPC No. 1858 of 2014 (M/s Mile Stone Soft. Tech. Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others). 2. The imperative facts, necessary to find-out whether respondent/contemnor prima facie dis-obeyed and disregarded the order of this Court and as to whether charges is to be framed against the respondent/contemnor are as under:- 2.1 The contempt petitioner herein instituted a writ petition (C) 1858 of 2014 impleading the State of Chhattisgarh, Election Commission of India and the Chief Electoral Officer, Chhattisgarh, questioning the order dated 10.09.2014 passed by the Chief Electoral Officer, Election Commission of Chhattisgarh. In the said writ petition Divi...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›