Madhya Pradesh Court November 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.
Prem @ Hariom Mehte Vs. Smt. Kavita
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
Writ Petition No.18426/2012 27.11.2012 Shri A.K.Choubey and Shri J. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner- registered owner and Driver of the offending tractor has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 21.9.2012, (Ann. P-1) passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narsinghpur in Motor Vehicle Case No.76/2011, whereby the prayer of the petitioner to call his witness namely R.B.Goswami through summon has been dismissed with a direction to keep such witness present before the Tribunal for his cross examination in the light of his affidavit filed under Order 18 Rule 4 of the CPC. Initially the case was argued at length on admission and allowing this petition but in response of some query of the court instead to argue further petitioner's counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition as not pressed with liberty to raise all the grounds and objection stated in th...
Surendra Singh Rana Vs. Madhya Pradesh Housingh Board Bhopal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR Writ Petition No.500 / 2010 Surendra Singh Rana & another Versus State of Madhya Pradesh & another ______________________________________________ Shri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.K.Samaiya and Shri Shailendra Samaiya, learned counsel for the respondent/Housing Board. PRESENT : Honble Shri R.S. Jha, J.: ORDER (27-11-2012) The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by the unprecedented and unreasonable increase in the price of the flat allotted to the petitioners in Satyamev Jayate Parisar, Tahsil Compound, Jabalpur, by the respondents.2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Housing Board floated a scheme in the name of Satyamev Jayate Parisar. proposing to construct and sell three bed room, hall, kitchen and two bedroom, hall, kitchen flats by notice published in the newspaper, dated 24-4-2004. The price of the flats were ranging from Rs. 6.3 lac to 7.90 lac depending upon th...
Union of India Vs. M/S Jai Ma Narmada Steels
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
1 W.P.No.4713 o27. 11.2012 Shri Sudhir Shrivastav, counsel for the petitioner. Having heard on the question of admission, it is directed that on payment of PF along with requisites of the registered post within three working days, notice against admission of this petition as well as IA No.4093/12 an application for grant of stay against execution of the arbitration award against which an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed before the district court as MJ.No.22/06, returnable by fixing the date in the month of January, 2013 be issued to the respondent, failing which this petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Bench. The impugned arbitration award has been passed to pay the sum, hence at present I am not inclined to grant any interim stay. However, it is observed that such prayer shall be considered by the Court soon after receiving the service report of said notice, hence office is directed to place ...
Dr.Varsha Sanghi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR Writ Petition No.11954 / 2010 Dr. Varsha Sanghi & another Versus State of Madhya Pradesh & another ______________________________________________ Shri R.K.Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.K.Samaiya and Shri Shailendra Samaiya, learned counsel for the respondent/Housing Board. PRESENT : Honble Shri R.S. Jha, J.: ORDER (27-11-2012) The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by the unprecedented and unreasonable increase in the price of the flat allotted to the petitioners in Satyamev Jayate Parisar, Tahsil Compound, Jabalpur, by the respondents.2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Housing Board floated a scheme in the name of Satyamev Jayate Parisar. proposing to construct and sell three bed room, hall, kitchen and two bedroom, hall, kitchen flats by notice published in the newspaper, dated 24-4-2004. The price of the flats were ranging from Rs. 6.3 lac to 7.90 lac depending upon thei...
Suresh Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.260/1998 Suresh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh : None for the appellant. Amicus Curiae : Ms. Manisha Shrivastava, Advocate. Counsel for the resp./State : Shri Santosh Yadav, Panel Lawyer. Present : Honble Mr. Justice Alok Aradhe JUDGMENT (27.11.2012) By the impugned judgment dated 6.1.1998 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Multai in Sessions Trial No.197/1996, the appellant has been convicted under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years.2. The prosecution case is that on 13.5.1996 at about 4.30 p.m., the appellant assaulted his father namely Tulsiram, as a result of which he sustained injury. The appellant took his father to the hospital. Thereafter, the victim Tulsiram was medically examined and one fracture on parietal region of the skull was found. No other injury was found on the body of the victim namely Tulsiram. ...
Daulat Bhariya Vs. Northern Coalfields Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR WRIT PETITION No.1047 OF 200.Shri Daulat Bhariya Petitioner versus Northern Coalfields LTD.and others Respondents Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra MeNo..................................................................................................Shri Amitabh Gupta for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Rusia for respondents No.1 to 4. Shri Rakesh Jain for respondent No.6...............................................................................................ORDER (27/11/2012) ControveRs.involved in this writ petition pertains to appointment of the petitioner in the establishment of the respondents and the discrepancy in the name of the petitioner in various documents submitted for seeking appointment. Respondents' establishment issued an advertisement for filling up 194 posts of various trades. One of the post notified was that in the trade of Technician (Trainee) in the Fitter Trade. Petitioner applied and it seems that after following...
Jai Pal Vs. Ranjeet
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
1 W.P.No.18400 o27. 11.2012 Shri Manot Kumar Yadav, counsel for the petitioner. He is heard on the question of admission. The petitioner/defendant No.2 has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 3.10.12 Annex.P/1 passed by Civil Judge Class I Parasiya district Chhindwara in Co.No.31-A09 whereby the application of respondent No.1/plaintiff filed under Order 6 rule 17 of the CPC dated 20.9.07 and 16.8.12 respectively have been allowed. The petitioner's counsel after taking me through the papers placed on the record prayed for dismissal of aforesaid both the applications of the respondents by admitting and allowing this petition. Keeping in view his arguments, I have carefully gone through the papers placed on the record along with the impugned order. It appears that such order has been passed by the trial court under the vested jurisdiction and discretion of such court and as per settled principle of the law whenever order is...
Brijlal Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
(1) Cr.A.No.1416/2001 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR DIVISION BENCH:HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH SAKSENA HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE T.K.KAUSHAL CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1416/2001 APPELLANT : Brajlal S/o Sukhlal, Caste-Gwara aged 35 years Village Manpur Chouky Dora, P.S. Baihar Tahsil & District Balaghat. Versus RESPONDENT : State of Madhya Pradesh through P.S. Baihar District Balaghat. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Appellant : Smt. Durgesh Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondent/State : Shri Umesh Pandey, Govt. Advocate. Date of hearing :20. 11/2012 Date of judgment:27. 11/2012 (JUDGMENT ) Per: Rakesh Saksena; J.Appellant Brajlal has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 17.8.2001 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat in Sessions Trial No.56/2000, convicting the appellant under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 2000/-. In defaul...
Suresh Singh Dangi Vs. Authorised Officer
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
Writ Petition No.18808/2012 27.11.2012 Shri Manish Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. He is heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the notice Annexure P-2 whereby his mortgaged property in connection some loan has been directed to be placed on auction to recover sum sum of such loan. According to such notice, Annexure P-2 on account of not payment of the sum of the loan, the aforesaid property has been directed to be placed on auction with the direction to carry out such proceeding from 16.11.2012. In addition to it, it is also stated in the prayer clause that the petitioner is ready to deposit the some part of loan amount at present with further averment that remaining amount shall be deposited after some period by selling other property and crops and for that some time is also prayed. In the couRs.of arguments on asking the petitioner's counsel that in the available scenario wh...
Smt.Nawabi Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
Writ Petition No.19225/12. 27.11.2012 Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Sharda Dubey, learned P.L.for the respondent no.1 to 3-State. 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 5.10.2012 passed by the authority of the respondent no.4 whereby, the respondents no.5 & 6 have been permitted to install the petrol pump on the land of the petitioners described in the writ petition. Such prayer is made on the back ground that the said land was never sold by the petitioner to the respondents no.5 & 6. After taking me through the averments of the petition as well as the papers placed on the record along with the impugned order Annexure-P-6. Initially petitioners counsel has made prayer for quashment of the aforesaid order by admitting and allowing this petition but in response of some query based on the legal position on the terminology of co-owner and owner o...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »