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.
State Bank of India Vs. M/S Mid India Corp.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
1 F.A.No.335/2006 F.A.NO.335/2006 05.10.2012 Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant.I.A. No.10128/2008, is an application under Order 5 Rule 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; whereby appellant seeks leave of this Court to serve notice on respondents No.1 and 2 by publication in daily newspaper Dainik Bhaskar published from Jabalpur and having its circulation in District Jabalpur, where the respondents no.1 and 2 are last reported to have resided. After due consideration the application is allowed. Let the requisites be paid within 7 days and after publication of notice and summons in the daily newspaper the copy of the same along with affidavit be filed.I.A. No.10128/2008, is accordingly disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. (AJIT SINGH) (SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE JUDGE Loretta...
Bankelal Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
W.P.No.2369/2009 05.10.2012 Shri Ashok Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petition is hopelessly delayed as in accordance to the petitioner himself, for the fiRs.time, the supersession had taken place in the year 1969, and repeatedly in the year 1972, which continued upto the year 2008. Though it is contended that the petitioner was making the representation, nothing is placed on record to indicate that such a representation was ever made by the petitioner indicating as to how he has been superseded. No grievance was ever raised by the petitioner till his age of superannuation. For the fiRs.time, it appears that the representation was made by the petitioner in the year 2009, that too after his retirement. In view of the aforesaid, nothing can be done in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is dismissed as is hit by inordinate unexplained delay and laches. (K.K.Trivedi) Judge A.Praj....
Smt. Archana Dwivedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
W.P.No.2654/2012 (Smt. Archna Dwivedi versus State of MP and otheRs.05.10.2012 Shri S.K.Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, learned Dy. G.A.for the State. Heard. Though the petitioner has filed this petition against order cancelling the award of work for supply of mid-day- meals to the petitioner at Government Primary School, Kotra Pahadi, Gram Panchayat Sonvarsha, Tahsil Sihawal, District Sidhi against which the petitioner has filed a representation before the Collector, Sidhi, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petition be disposed of with a direction to the Collector, Sidhi to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 02.12.2011 against the aforesaid withdrawal of the work . The Dy. Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that the representation of the petitioner shall be considered and decided by the Collector, Sidhi, expeditiously, in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid, the peti...
Jitendra Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
WRIT PETITION No.16482/20105. 10.2012 Shri Dinesh Upadhyay, learned Counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondents-State. The petitioners claim grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioners in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench at Indore Bench of this Court, in W.A.No.346/2008 (Smt. Usha Ranawat versus State of M.P.and others).dated 18.12.2008. By the aforesaid order passed, more than 25 writ appeals claiming similar benefits were decided and it was directed that the benefit of pay fixation in the regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment shall be made to the petitioners therein. In fact the Division Bench has upheld the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various cases and while deciding the writ appeals in para-19 the following directions were issued by the Division Bench: 19. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal filed by writ petitione...
Jagdish Chandra Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
MA.. No.228/2011 1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava M.A. No.228/2011 .....APPELLANTS 1 Jagdish Chandra s/o Kalideen Claimants Kethwas (Passi) by occupation unemployed, 2. Smt. Tulsi Bai, w/o Shri Jagdish Kethwas (Passi) by occupation unemployed & Housewife Both the appellants are residents of Near Railway Colony, DODAR, Tahsil Jaora, District Ratlam (M.P.) -Versus- ....RESPONDENT: The Union of India, through General Manager, Western Railway, Headquarter Office, Churchgate, Mumbai 20. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Chandrahas Dubey, Advocate for the appellants. Shri Govind Patel, Advocate for the respondent. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER {05.10.2012} Feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.10.2010 passed by learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Bench, Bhopal in O.A. No.105/2007 whereby the applic...
Ramesh Chourasia Vs. Chief Information Commission Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
W.P.No.15054/2012 (Ramesh Kumar versus C.I.C.) 05.10.2012 Heard Shri B.K.Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondent Chief Information Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh to decide the petitioner's appeal filed before the said Commissioner. On a perusal of the petition, it is evident that the petitioner has neither mentioned the date on which the alleged appeal has been filed before the Chief Information Commissioner not has any date been mentioned in the document (annexure P-3).which is said to be the appeal filed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also not mentioned the number of the appeal and therefore it is not clear as to whether the Chief Information Commissioner has registered the appeal filed by the petitioner or as to whether the same is pending or not. In the circumstances, I find no reason to issue any direction, as prayed for by the petitioner. The...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Bhagwati
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
1 M.A. 999/2012 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K. SHRIVASTAVA M.A. No.999/2012 .........Appellant: The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Branch Office Chhindwara, Tahsil and District Chhindwara Versus .......Respondents/:1. Smt. Bhagwati, Wd/o Late Punaram, Claimants/ 2. Sunil, S/o Late Punaram Dhurve, 3. Ku. Baijanti, D/o Late Punaram Dhurve, All three are residents of Gram Lonadehi, Police Station Lavaghoghari, Tahsil and District Chhindwara 4. Golu alias Dinesh, S/o Moreshwar Khiraikar, R/o Gram Dunaa, Tahsil Police Station Multai, District Betul --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appellant by - Shri Rakesh Jain, Advocate Respondents No.1 to 3 by - Shri G.S. Baghel, Advocate Respondent no.4 by - Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, Advocate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (05/10/2012) This appeal has been filed unde...
Sanjay and anr. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Appeal No.899/1997 Vinot VERSUS State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.Usmani, counsel for the appellants. Shri Puneet Shroti, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 5th day of October, 2012) The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 10.4.1997 passed by the learned Seventh Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T.No.1013/1992, whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under section 307 or 307 read with section 34 of IPC and each sentenced for 3 years' rigorous imprisonment.2. Prosecution's story, in short, is that, on 1.4.1992, at about 4 p.m. in the evening, the complainant Golu Yadav (P.W.4) was standing near the shop of Mohan in the locality of Riz Road, Jabalpur....
M/S Supreme Buildcon Private Limited Vs. Commissioner
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
W.P.No.16495/2012 (M/S Supreme BuildCo.PVT.LTD.versus Commissioner and otheRs.05.10.2012 Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.P.Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by orders dated 21.05.2012 and 25.05.2012 issued by the respondent No.3 directing the petitioner to submit the no objection certificate and the Royalty payment certificate. It is stated that the controveRs.involved in the present petition is covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the cases of M/s Narsingh Construction Company versus State of M.P.& Ors., W.P No.4658/2012 decided on 13.4.2012 and M/s Chandrama Construction Company versus M.P.Rajya Krishi Vipran Sangh & OtheRs.W.P No.1361/2009. The aforesaid aspects are not disputed by the learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent/State. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is...
Smt.Kasturi Sen Vs. Ram Sajivan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
1 F.A. 633/2003 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K. SHRIVASTAVA F.A. No.633/2003 .........Appellant:1. Smt. Kasturi Sen, W/o Ramsajivan Sen residing at Primary Health Centre Campus, Laundi, District Chhattarpur (M.P.) Versus .......Respondent: Ram Sajivan S/o Shri Garibdas Sen, Residing at Village Ran, Police Station- Khann, District Hamirpur, at present residing at New Bus Stand, Laundi, District Chhattarpur (M.P.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appellant by - Shri A.L. Patel, Advocate Respondent by - None through served --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (05/10/2012) Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25.11.2003 passed by learned Fourth Additional District Judge, Chhattarpur in Case No.70A/2001 Hindu Marriage Act whereby the application under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- Next ›
- Last »