Madhya Pradesh Court October 2012 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.
V.P. Kulshrestha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
..1.. W.A.No.940/12 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR (M.P.) Writ Appeal No.940 of 2012 V.P.Kulshrestha S/o late Shri Lahorilal age:56. years Occupation: Service Address: Office of the Jt. Director, Town and Country Planning Department, E-5, Paryavaran Parisar, Shahpura, Bhopal (M.P.) .Appellant/petitioner Versus State of M.P. Through its Principal Secretary Department of Housing and Environment, Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) Respondent PRESENT: Hon'ble Shri Justice Krishn Kumar Lahoti Hon'ble Justice Smt.Vimla Jain Shri Ajay Mishra, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Pushpendra Yadav, Counsel for appellant. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Counsel for respondent. ORDER (Passed on 19.10.2012) This writ appeal is directed against an order dated 9.8.2012 passed by the Single Bench in Writ Petition No.12761/2012(s), by which prayer of the petitioner for ad interim writ was declined.2. Learned counsel appearing for appellant submitted :- (i) That the aforesaid prayer ...
Govind Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
W.P.No.16112/2012 (Govind and others versus State of MP and otheRs.19.10.2012 Heard Shri Sandeep Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioners who are the temporary vendors and who have installed temporary stalls adjacent to the old Japand Panchayat, Patera Disrict Damoh have filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondents/authorities to decide the representation filed by the petitioners wherein they have prayed that they may not be removed/displaced. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been putting up their stalls in the concerned place since last several years and without taking into account this fact the respondents propose to construct shops behind the existing stalls of the petitioners pursuant to which the petitioners would be displaced and removed. It is submitted that the petitioners have filed a representation before the Collector, Damoh as well as Tahs...
Smt. Kamalni Pagare Vs. I.D.B.i. Bank Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
1 W.P.No.17603 o19. 10.2012 Shri Devendra Gangrade, counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner/appellant/accused has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 3.3.12 passed by the Collector, Bhopal in Case No.20/B-121/11-12 whereby the application on behalf of respondent No.1 under section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,2002, has been allowed and pursuant to it the Tehsildar Huzur has been directed to take physical possession of the mortgaged property (house) and hand-over the possession to the Bank and if it is needed then police help may also be taken by the Tehsildar. In the couRs.of arguments, in response of some query of the court, petitioner's counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition with a prayer to extend him liberty to file the fresh representation in the office of the authority of respondent No.1 to r...
Ramesh Chand Kochar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
W.P.No.17719/2012 (R.C.Kochar versus State of MP and otheRs.19.10.2012 Heard Shri T.S.Ruprah, learned Senior counsel with Shri Harpreet Ruprah, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by a show cause notice-cum- order dated 25.09.2012 issued by the respondent No.3, the Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Kareli by which the petitioner has been asked to remove the Murum and Gitti which has been put by him to reinforce the pathway constructed by him on his own land. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the entire land including the area where the lane has been made belongs to the petitioner and it is for facilitating the movement of vehicles within his area as well as to provide proper excess to the go down constructed by the petitioner on his own land, that he has put Murun and Gitti and the respondent has not authority to interfere in the matter. I...
Kailash Agrawal Vs. the District Magisrate Jabalpur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
1 W.A.No.1259/2012 19.10.2012 Shri Sunil Gupta, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Ankur Modi and Shri Sankalp Kochar, Advocates for the appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy. Advocate General for respondent No.1. Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2. Shri Swapnil Ganguly, Advocate for respondents No.3 to 6. Shri Pushpendra Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.7. None for respondents No.8 to 11. This appeal is directed against an order dated 09.10.2012 in W.P.No.15611/2012 by which the learned Single Judge disposed of the matter with a direction to the appellant and respondents No.8 to 11 to file reply within three weeks as undertaken by them with a further direction to the respondent No.1 District Magistrate, Jabalpur to reconstitute the records and decide the matter on merits as early as possible by taking into consideration all aspects of the matter in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that before the District Magistrate, 2 Jabalpur, the respondent...
Tibetan Sweater Exhibition Sale Commitee Vs. the Municipoal Corporatio ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
1 W.P.No.17889 o19. 10.2012 Shri Manot Sharma, counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Anshuman Singh, counsel for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri Anuj Agarwal, counsel for respondent No.3. Smt Sheetal Dubey, GA for respondent No.4. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 9.10.12 Annex.P/1 passed by respondent No.2 Addl. Commissioner whereby their applications for grant of permission to hold the exhibition at some alleged place of Jabalpur, has been refused. In the couRs.of arguments on admission, I am apprised by the counsel of respondent No.1 and 2 that the impugned order is made appellable under section 403(2) (b) of the Municipal Corporation Act and the petitioners may file the statutory appeal under such provision for setting aside the impugned order. Having heard the petitioners counsel at length, in view of availability of alternate remedy to file the appeal against the impug...
Rajesh Vinodiya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
1 W.P.No.17830/2012 Rajesh Vinodiya versus State of M.P.& ORS.19.10.2012 Shri Anil Sachdeva, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.P.Tiwari, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate, for the respondent/State. On directions of this Court, Shri Rajesh Kumar Dubey, Town Inspector, Police Station, Adharthal has produced the missing person i.e.respondent no.6 Smt. Seema Vinodiya, wife of the petitioner as it was alleged by the petitioner that she has been illegally detained by respondent no.5. Respondent no.6, who is present in person, states that she does not wish to live with her husband and is residing with respondent no.5 without any pressure or force. Looking to the fact that the respondent no.6 is a major and does not wish to stay with the petitioner and that she is not in illegal confinement, I find no reason to issue a writ of habeas corpus as prayed for. The petition, filed by the petitioner, is disposed of by recording the statement of respondent no.6 as aforesaid. ( R.S.JHA ) JUDGE mms/-...
Central Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd Dehri-1 Teh. Kundum Jabalpur Vs. the State ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
W.P.No.17144 o19. 10.2012 Shri Manot Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Let this matter be listed in the week commencing 29.10.2012 alongwith W.P.No.17060/2012, W.P.No.17152/2012, W.P.No.17149/2012, W.P.No.17162/2012 by giving separate number in the daily cause list. ( U.C.Maheshwari ) Judge bks W.P.No.17060 o19. 10.2012 Shri Manot Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Let this matter be listed in the week commencing 29.10.2012 alongwith W.P.No.17144/2012, W.P.No.17152/2012, W.P.No.17149/2012, W.P.No.17162/2012 by giving separate number in the daily cause list. ( U.C.Maheshwari ) Judge bks W.P.No.17152 o19. 10.2012 Shri Manot Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Let this matter be listed in the week commencing 29.10.2012 alongwith W.P.No.17144/2012, W.P.No.17060/2012, W.P.No.17149/2012, W.P.No.17162/2012 by giving separate number in the daily cause list. ( U.C.Maheshwari ) Judge bks W.P.No.17149 o19. 10.2012 Shri Manot Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. L...
Shakir Bux Siddiqui Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
M.C.C.No.1038 of 2012. 19.10.2012. Shri Atulanand Awasthy for the applicant. Shri Vijay Pandey,Dy.AG for the respondents. This application is filed for clarification of the order dt.27.8.2012 passed in W.A.No.960/2012 by which a writ appeal filed by the applicant was finally disposed of by an order, which reads thus: Appellant Shakir Bux Siddiqui present in person. None for respondents. This appeal is directed against an order dated 14.08.2012 in W.P.No.12174/2012(S) by which writ petition preferred by appellant against the transfer order dated 14.07.2012, transferring appellant, who is a Moharair, from Nagar Palika, Teonthar, District Rewa to Nagar Palika, Umariya on the same post, was dismissed. The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition permitted appellant to file a representation against the transfer order within a period of one week and the authority was directed to decide the representation within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representat...
Vijay Kumar Soni Vs. Devendra Kumar Soni
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2012
W.P.No.17924/2012 19.10.2012 Shri Priyank Khandelwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Having heard on the question of admission, it is directed that on payment of PF alongwith requisite of registered post within seven working days, the notice against admission of this petition as well as on IA No.13924/12, returnable by fixing a date within six weeks be issued to the respondent, failing which this petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Bench. As an interim measure till next hearing the trial court is directed not to deliver any final judgment and decree in the matter unless the order of this court. C c as per rules. (U.C.Maheshwari) Judge bks...