Madhya Pradesh Court November 2008 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.
Siddharth Shrivastava and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT262
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. These writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order because common questions of law arise for decision in all these writ petitions.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (for short 'the MPPSC) published an advertisement dated 4-3-2007 inviting applications for recruitment to 240 posts of Civil Judge Class II. In the advertisement, it was indicated that 2% of the 240 posts advertised, which works out to 5 posts, ar reserved for orthopaedically handicapped persons. In response to the advertisement, the petitioners who claim to be orthopaedically handicapped persons filed applications along with certificates showing the percentage of disability suffered by them. After the written test and interview, they were selected and placed in the merit list of orthopaedically handicapped candidates by the MPPSC. The MPPSC then sent the merit list of orthopaedically handicapped candidates along with other merit lists t...
Babulal S/O Mukund Shah Gupta and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT439
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 6-5-2008 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Kukshi, in Cr.A. No. 46/08, whereby the judgment dated 11-2-08 passed by JMFC, Kukshi in Criminal Case No. 688/05, whereby the petitioners were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 4-A of Public Gambling Act by sentencing them to undergo six months RI and fine of Rs. 1,000/- each was set aside and the case was remanded to the Trial Court for retrial, the present revision petition has been filed.2. Case of the prosecution was that on 25-10-05 at about 3:30 PM upon information a search was made in which it was found that on the shop of petitioner No. 1 petitioners are gambling on Sri Lanka and India Cricket Match and after receipt of money are issuing the slips. After framing of charges and also after recording of evidence the offence was found proved and petitioners were convicted as stated hereinabove. An appeal was preferred against that order, where...
Raj Kumar JaIn Vs. Usha Mukhariya (Smt.)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT228
R.S. Jha, J.1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the tenant against whom a judgment and decree of eviction have been passed by the Fourth Civil Judge, Class-II, Sagar on 1-5-2003 in Civil Suit No. 103-A/2001 and affirmed by the First Appellate Court, Sagar, by the judgment and decree dated 31-3-2005 passed in Civil Appeal No. 58-A/2004.2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, are that the appellant/defendant was inducted as tenant in part of house No. 308 on 1-7-1988 on Rs. 400/- per month as rent by the husband of respondent/plaintiff Smt. Usha Mukhariya. Subsequently, the respondent/plaintiff gave a notice of eviction to the appellant/defendant on the ground of arrears of rent and bonafide requirement of the accommodation by the respondent/plaintiff for non-residential purpose of her son. As the notice went unreplied, a suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking eviction on the grounds mentioned under Sections 12(1)(a) and 12(1)(f) of the Madhya Pra...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Insurance Ombudsman and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-2008
Reported in: 2006ACJ2691; 2009(1)MPHT148
ORDERSanjay Yadav, J.1. Challenge put forth in the present writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is to an order dated 8-7-2003, passed by Insurance Ombudsman respondent No. 1; whereby, the claim put forth by respondent No. 2 has been allowed and the petitioner was directed to settle the claim for a sum insured i.e., Rs. 80,000/- along with 9% per annum from 1-4-1994 till the date of full and final payment.2. The facts in nut shell are that respondent No. 2-Smt. Archana Chourasiya filed a complaint to the Insurance Ombudsman, respondent No. 1 on 29-7-2002, seeking the claim of Rs. 80,000/- in lieu of death of her husband Shri Ashok Chourasiya, who was working as Assistant Grade II in the Office of Executive Engineer, M.P. Electricity State Board (for short referred to as 'MPSEB') City Division, North, Bhopal. The said Ashok Chourasiya met with an accidental death on 24-11-1993. The claim put forth by Smt. Archana Chourasiya respondent No. 2, was on the a...
Mahatma Dhule Shiksha Evam Samaj Kalyan Samiti Vs. State of M.P. and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-2008
Reported in: AIR2009MP59
Dipak Misra, J.1. The present writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India depicts and mirrors a scenario which manifestly imprisons the concept of pristine justice possibly on the base of perversely nurtured idea that one can easily defile the precincts of the temple of justice by defying the eternal law that if there is a singular path to seek justice, it is only by correct exposition of facts. And there are many ways to crucify justice on assertion of facts in an unscrupulous and deceitful manner pretending ignorance. Not for nothing, it has been said that one who looks away from something is very much aware that the said thing exists. A litigant may think that his pretended lack of knowledge is in the realm of unsubstantiality and the Court should not be ultra-sensitive to the same, but the real hub of the matter is whether the Court should ignore a fracture in the system of adjudication and dispensation of justice when a decadent propensity is shown on th...
Dr. Rakhi Mangal Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-2008
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR878]; 2009(1)MPHT121
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The petitioner is a person with disability and has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the provisions of Rule 1.8 (4) and Rule 1.20 (11) of the Madhya Pradesh Medical Dental Post Graduate Course Entrance Examination Rules, 2008 (for short 'the Rules, 2008') made under Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Chikitsa Shiksha Sanstha Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1973.2. The facts relevant for disposal of the petition briefly are that the State Government made the Rules, 2008 for admissions to the Post Graduate Medical (M.D. & M.S.) Course, Post Graduate Diploma and Dental (MDS) Course in Medical & Dental Colleges in the State of Madhya Pradesh. Rule 1.8 of the Rules, 2008 provides for reservation and Sub-rule (4) of Rule 1.8 provides that 3% seats are reserved for admissions to Post Graduate Courses for physically handicapped persons who are bonafide residents of Madhya Pradesh and belong to ST, SC, OBC and Unreserved Categories and that ...
Bapupuri Vs. Madhya Pradesh Vidyut Vitran Company Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT88
S.L. Kochar, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 156 of the Electricity Act 2003 (For short 'the Act') read with Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (For short 'the Code') against the judgment dated 15-12-07 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Special Judge, Biaora District Rajgarh) in Special Case No. 267/06, thereby holding the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 135 of the Act, convicted and sentenced him to pay Rs. 8,445/- fine and in default of payment of fine to suffer additional S.I. for six months and also fixed civil liability as per provision under Section 154(5) of the Act.2. On inspection by the Junior Engineer Shri D.L. Koshtha (CW-1) of M.P. Electricity Supply Company accompanied by helper Motilal on 16-02-06, found that near the bank of Parvati river in village Kanarkhedi, the accused was irrigating his field by 5 HP Motor Pump by taking electricity directly from Lower Tension line. Appellant had not taken any regular e...
K.N. Shukla Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT128
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. The petitioner has been holding the post of Joint Director, Directorate of Agriculture, Bhopal in the State of Madhya Pradesh since 2-8-1996. Parliament enacted the Madhya Pradesh Re-organisation Act, 2000 (for short '2000 Act') forming some of the erstwhile territories of the existing State of Madhya Pradesh as a separate State of Chhattisgarh on and from the 'appointed day'. In Section 2 (a) of the 2000, 'appointed day' was defined as the date which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. The Central Government appointed 1st of November, 2000 as the appointed day. Sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the 2000 Act provided that every person who immediately before the appointed day is serving in connection with the affairs of the existing State of Madhya Pradesh shall, on or from that day provisionally continue to serve in connection with the affairs of the State of Madhya Pradesh unless he is required, by general or special o...
Mohd. Hasib Vs. Rubina
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT58
ORDERS.C. Sinho, J.1. Invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as 'the Code'). Petitioner has filed this petition for quashing the execution proceedings pending in the Court of JMFC, Bhopal, in MJC No. 21/06.2. Respondent/divorced wife filed a MJC No. 4/03 against her husband under Section 3 of The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (referred as 'the Act'), before JMFC, Bhopal vide order dated 30-9-2003. Respondent was granted Rs. 25,786/- Maihar amount, Rs. 6,000/- maintenance for Iddat period and Rs. 3,00,000/- for reasonable and fair provisions, and maintenance etc. It was also directed that petitioner shall return dowry items.3. However, the petitioner did not comply the order and respondent moved an application for execution of the order for payment of maintenance as MJC No. 12/05, petitioner was sentenced to one year imprisonment vide order dated 10-8-2005. Petitioner h...
Kailash Chand Munyar and ors. Vs. M.P. State Road Transport Corporatio ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-04-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT39
ORDERSanjay Yadav, J.1. The order passed in this writ petition shall govern the disposal of Writ Petition Nos. 11830/2008, 11844/2008 and 11845/2008, because the issue involved in these writ petitions are similar. For the sake of record the facts of W.P. No. 11824/2008 are taken into consideration.2. The petitioner by way of present writ petition seeks quashment of order dated 11-11-2005, Annexure P-5; whereby, the petitioner was informed that since the petitioner has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of allotment and cause delay in payment of premium, the allotment of shop stand cancelled and amount of premium deposited stand forfeited.3. The facts in nutshell are that Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, respondent No. 1, issued a Notice Inviting Tender for construction of 7 shops within the Bus Stand premises at Hoshangabad under self financing scheme vide notification published in newspaper dated 30-5-2000. The tender of the petitioner was accepted and an i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »