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.
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Ramesh Kumar Barman
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
W.P.No.18977/2012 23.11.2012 Shri Rohit Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order under the provisions of law. It is made clear that in case the petitioner files such an appeal within three weeks, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same and shall not dismiss it only on the ground of limitation. The original certified copy of the impugned order be returned to the learned counsel for the petitioner subject to the same being substituted by a photocopy. With the aforesaid liberty, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of as withdrawn. C.C.as per rules. (R.S.Jha) Judge gn...
Kamlesh and ors. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Appeal No.865/1997 Satya Narayan & others VERSUS State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.Usmani, counsel for the appellants. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 23rd day of November, 2012) The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 10.4.1997 passed by the learned Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Katni in Special case No.2/1995, whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under section 3 (1) (xi) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter it will be referred to as 'Special Act') and each sentenced for 2 years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.250/- and in default of payment of fine, one month's rigor...
Mohit Filling Station Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
W.P.No.19563/2012 (Mohit Filling Station versus State of Mp and otheRs.23.11.2012 Heard Shri Rajneesh Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the resolution and the decision of the respondent/Corporation to enhance the licence fees. The appropriate remedy available to the petitioner under the provisions of M.P.Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 is to approach the State Government under section 417, 412 etc.and other provisions, part IX Chapter XXXIV of the Act. With the aforesaid liberty the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of . C.C.as per rules. (R.S.Jha) Judge msp...
Sarvajanik Hanuman Mandir Trust Vs. the Collector,
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
W.P.No.18997/2012 (Sarvajanik Hanuman Mandir Trust versus The State of M.P.& ors.) 23.11.2012 Heard Shri D.R.Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the respondent No.3 is not passing appropriate orders on the request of the petitioner to deposit the gold ornaments and other assets of the trust in the district treasury, which have been released by the Income Tax Department. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of repeated applications and representations, no decision thereon has been taken by the said authority and in such circumstances, the respondent No.3 be directed to take a decision at an early date so as to ensure that the property of the trust is kept in safe custody as the concerned banks are not willing to take the responsibility of providing a locker for such a huge quantity of gold ornaments and other assets. In view of the aforesai...
Sunil Ramchandrani Vs. Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
W.P.No.19534/2012 (Sunil Ramchandani versus Union of India & anor.) 23.11.2012 Heard Shri Pratyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. The only relief prayed for by the petitioner in the present petition is for issuance of a direction to the Chief Passport Officer, Ministry of External AffaiRs.New Delhi to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner before the said authority as the petitioner is required to go to Johannesburg urgently but he is not able to do so as the Passport has not been reissued to the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid, without entering into the merits of the case, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner furnishes a copy of the order passed today alongwith copy of the petition on the respondent authorities within 15 days, the said authority shall consider and decide the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period ...
Mohammad Rajik Ansari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
Mohammed Rajik Ansari versus State of MP and others 23.11.2012. Shri N.S.Ruprah for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Petitioner is working as Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat Raichaur, Tehsil Lakhnadon, District Seoni. It is stated that apart from the aforesaid post held by the petitioner, additional charge of certain other Gram Panchayat is also given to the petitioner. However, vide order-dated 14.7.2012 Annexure P/1 petitioner was transferred to Gram Panchayat Dorlichhatarpur under Janpad Panchayat Seoni, about 85 Kms away. Challenging the aforesaid transfer on various grounds, petitioner has approached this Court by filing a writ petition bearing No.14325/2012 and on 5.9.2012, vide order Annexure P/12, a Bench of this Court found that transfer of the petitioner is challenged mainly on the ground of breach of certain policies of the State Government and, therefore, disposed of the writ petition directing the Collector to consider and decid...
Devendra Bapna Vs. Shri Manoj Goyal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
Conc No.849 of 2009. 23.11.2012. Shri A.J.Pawar for the petitioner. Shri Jitendra Shrivastava for the respondent No.1. Shri D.K.Dixit for respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though a review DPC has been convened,but, benefit of said DPC has not been extended to the petitioner as has been directed in para 26 of the order passed by the Division Bench. It was further submitted that in the light of the order dt.16.8.2011 by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.7308/09, petitioner may be promoted as per the directions in para 26 of the order passed by the Division Bench. On raising such contention, Shri Dixit, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submitted that so far retirement benefits are concerned, he has no objection,but, so far promotion of the petitioner to the post of Joint Director is concerned, it will affect the status of respondent No.2 who was already promoted on the post of Joint Director. In this regard he has referred an order dt.24.4.200...
Tirath Prasad Jharia Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
Tirath Prasad Jharia versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.19638 23. 11.2012: Shri S.S.Sengar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner has been transferred from the post of Gram Sahayak of Janpad Panchayat Chapara, District Seoni to another Janpad Panchayat in the same District. It seems that along with petitioner five more persons were transferred and on the request and recommendation of the Minister of the District concerned the transfer of all these five employees have been cancelled. Grievance of petitioner is that similar consideration has not been extended to the petitioner. Keeping in view the aforesaid, it is directed that on petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order before the competent authority, the competent authority shall taken note of recommendation made, the action taken in the case of similarly situated employees and shall pass appropriate orders on the representation of petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified...
Paramlal @ Parma and ors. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.1583/1997 Paramlal @ Param & 2 Others versus The State of Madhya Pradesh Counsel for the appellants : Shri L.N.Sakle, Advocate. Counsel for the resp./State : Shri Swapnil Gangully, Panel Lawyer. Present : Honble Mr.Justice Alok Aradhe JUDGMENT (23.11.2012) The appellants No.1 and 2 have been convicted under Section 324 /34 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default of payment of amount of fine simple imprisonment for a period of six months. The appellant No.3 has been convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for a period of six months by the impugned judgment dated 28.7.1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Begumganj in Sessions Tri...
PravIn Chandra Mishra Vs. the Collector, Rewa
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2012
W.P.No.19569/2012 (P.C.Mishra versus the Collector and otheRs.23.11.2012 Heard Shri A.K.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondent No.2/the Regional Transport Officer, Rewa to cancel the registration of Truck not MP 1.HH 011.registered in the name of the respondent No.3 and thereafter register it in the name of the petitioner who is an agent of M/S.Induslnd Bank Ltd., Rewa. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the vehicle had been financed by the Induslnd Bank and the respondent No.3 has defaulted in making the payment of instalments, therefore, the prayer is being made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle be registered in the name of the petitioner who is an agent of the Bank concerned. Inspite of repeated query, the learned counsel for the petitioner has not placed any statutory provisions on record before this court under w...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »