Madhya Pradesh Court June 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.
Smt. Durga Bai Vs. Guddu Vishwakarma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
....1. . F.A.No. 581 o20. 6.2012 Shri B.P. Sharma, Counsel for the appellant. I.A.6676/2012 seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Issue notice of this application to the other side. Steps within three working days by registered A.D. mode. I.A.6675/12 application for stay. Issue notice of this application to the other side. Steps within three working days. Till next date of hearing, in the interest of justice, we direct that the respondent shall not contact another marriage without seeking prior permission of this Court. Appellant to serve this ex parte interim order to the other side within a period of three working days by registered post and to file compliance report in the Registry within a period of one month. C.C.as per rules. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Vimla Jain) Judge Judge vj...
Gram Panchayat Bhitari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
W.P. No.6691/2012 20.6.2012 Shri Gopal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B. K. Pandey, learned Dy. G.A. for the respondents. Challenging the order Annexure P/21 dated 28.3.2012 interlocutory in nature passed by the Additional Commissioner, Rewa Division, granting certain interim relief to the respondent No.7 who was working as a Panchayat Secretary, this writ petition has been filed. Record indicates that respondent No.7 was working as Panchayat Secretary and on various grounds his services were dispensed with. The matter was challenged before the Collector. The Collector dismissed the appeal and the matter is now pending before the Additional Commissioner. Finding a prima facie case made out for staying the order of Collector and the consequential termination, the Additional Commissioner has passed the impugned order and on the perusal of the impugned order indicates that various reasons are given by the Commissioner for interfering into the matter at the interlocutory s...
Ankit Tracom Private Limited Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax Ii
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
....1. . W.P.No. 12543 o20. 6.2012 Shri Abhishek Oswal, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Lal, Counsel for the respondents/State. I.A. No.3788/12 : Learned counsel submitted that he may be allowed a short time to move an appropriate application seeking amendment in the petition and to produce the documents which are filed alongwith the application. Prayer is allowed. I.A.No.5517/12 for bringing the status of action taken by the Central Vigilance Commission of India, New Delhi against the Income Tax Officials, Jabalpur. The aforesaid facts are taken on record and this aspect will be considered at the time of hearing, if pressed. With the aforesaid, I.A. is finally disposed of. Ad interim writ issued earlier shall continue till next date of hearing. List in the month of July,2012. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Vimla Jain) Judge Judge vj...
Smt. Mamta Vishwakarma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
....1. . W.P.No. 17379 o20. 6.2012 Shri S.K. Garg, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Jaideep Singh, learned Dy. A.G. for the respondents with Shri G.R. Chandrawanshi, Sub Inspector, P.S. Garha. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the out set submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw this petition. Prayer is not opposed by Shri Singh. Hence it is allowed. This petition is dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Vimla Jain) Judge Judge vj...
Gajju @ Gajendra Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
1 Criminal Revision No. 574/2010 20.06.2012. Shri Surendra Singh,learned Sr.Counsel with Shri Manish Mishra, Counsel for the applicant. Shri Akshay Namdeo, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. Ku.Juberia Khan,learned Counsel for objector. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. This petition under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C.has been filed by the petitioner against the charge put by 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad on 26.03.2010 for offence punishable under Sections 302/149 and 147 IPC with other co- accused persons in ST No.185/08. The charges framed are annexed as Annexure-A to the petition. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.05.2008 Sushil (since deceased) was shot dead by five persons. According to sole eye witness in the case, namely, Shivnath (PW.12) those five accused persons are co-accused Santosh, Surendra, Surjit, Sumersingh and Raju @ Malkhan. Photo copy of the statement of Shivnath (PW.12) is attached as Annexure-D to the petit...
Raja Ram Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
W.P.No.9498/2008 20/06/2012 None for the petitioner. Challenging a departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner vide charge-sheet dated 6.6.2007 and seeking quashment of the aforesaid charge-sheet, this writ petition is filed. Even though more than three years have passed, notices have not been issued to the respondents and as such the enquiry into the charge-sheet would have been completed and final decision would have been taken, granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the action taken in accordance with law, this petition is disposed of. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd...
Smt. Geeta Devi Patel Vs. Virendra Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
F.A.No.553/2012 Smt.Geeta Devi Patel Virendra Kumar Patel 20.6.2012 Shri B.J.Chourasiya, counsel for appellant. Admit. Record of the trial Court be summoned. Issue notice to the other side of this appeal. Steps within a period of one week by Regd. A/D mode. I.A.No.6244/2012 for stay. Issue notice of this application to the other side. Steps within a period of three working days by Regd.A/D mode. Till next date of hearing, operation of impugned judgment and decree dated 13.2.2012, shall remain stayed. Appellant to serve this ex-parte interim stay order on the other side within a period of one week from today and to file compliance report in the office. Be listed for further consideration on I.A.No.6244/2012 in the 1st week of August, 2012. C.C., as per rules. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) JUDGE JUDGE M....
Anil Bharti Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
1 W.P. No.4596/2010 Anil Bharti vs. State of M.P. & Ors. 20.06.2012 Shri G. R. Deshmukh learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondent/State. Shri Kunal Thakre learned counsel for respondent no.5. Though several issues have been raised by the petitioner in the present petition, it is submitted that the respondent no.5 Dealer be directed to send intimation regarding change of the chassis of the vehicle purchased by the petitioner to the R.T.O. The learned counsel for respondent no.5 submits that the vehicle was purchased by the petitioner and was involved in an accident consequent to which it was severely damaged and, therefore, during repairs the entire body shell including the chassis was changed with the knowledge of the petitioner who has also paid for the expenses. In such circumstances, the learned counsel for respondent no.5 submits that he has no objection to sending an intimation to the R.T.O as well as to the petitioner to the ...
Mahesh Vyas Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2012
W.P. No. 8376/2012 (Mahesh Vyas Vs. State of MP and others) 20.06.2012 Shri Anil Lala, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Bisen, learned G.A. for the State. Shri V.P. Maran, Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jabalpur present in person. The petitioner, who is the Chairman of the Vipdan Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Tikamgarh has filed this petition being aggrieved by the show cause notice dated 26.05.2012 issued to the petitioner under section 48 (AA) of the Cooperative Societies Act as well as order dated 22.05.2012 by which the election programme has been notified by the respondents/authorities. As it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the term of the petitioner-Board was yet to expire and was to continue till December, 2012, therefore, this court had directed the learned Government Advocate appearing for the State to seek instructions as to how and why election had been notified six months before the date of expiry of the terms. Shri V.P. Maran,...
Moil Jan Shakti Majdoor Sangh Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2012
1. Sustained industrial growth is possible in a country with an optimum utilization of input. Labour, skilled on/and unskilled is an important nay an inevitable input without which no industry can function. And for better and maximum or the optimum utilization of this manpower harmony between the manpower input and the management which uses this manpower for a better output, is a first and foremost aspect in an industrial fora. Whereas disharmony between these two forces adversely affects the output and the future of industry. Vice versa is true when there is harmony. It is therefore, the workman whose efficiency is paramount to attain optimum. To maintain this efficiency the workman must have the congenial industrial environment. To attain the same, the workman must have the bargaining force without which he is subjected to exploitation. Since individual workman has no bargaining power having any impact. It is the collective bargaining power which is of some importance in the industri...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »