Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Mrs. Shanti Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : JUSTICE J.K.MAHESHWARI MISC. APPEAL NO.617 OF 200.Mrs. Shanti and others Vs. Union of India Shri Abhishek Arjaria, learned counsel for the appellants. Shri Sameer Beohar, learned counsel for respondent- Insurance Company ORDER (24/07/2012) Claimants have filed this appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 being aggrieved by the judgment dated 24/10/2007 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench, Bhopal in Original Application No.168/2004, dismissing the claim application filed by the claimants.2. The claimants i.e. wife, three daughters and one son have filed claim petition under Section 125 of the Railways Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Railways Act') seeking compensation for death of Rajesh aged 27 years doing job of labourer. It is averred that on 20/2/2001 deceased-Rajesh was travelling in Itarsi-Nagpur Passenger Train from Betul to Amla having the second class journey ticket. Due to...
Star Sahakari Machhua Samudayik Matayas Palan Samiti Maryadit Vs. Jila ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
W.P.No.365/2010 (Star Sahakari Machhua Samudayik Matasya Palan Samiti Maryadit versus Jila Panchayat, Seoni and another) 24.07.2012 Smt. Smita Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 23.12.2009 passed by the Commissioner, Jabalpur Division Jabalpur dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the decision of the Jila Panchayat, Seoni dated 10.07.2009 awarding the fishery contract for Borikalan Tank to the respondent No.2 for a period of ten yeaRs.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that infact on an application being filed by the respondent No.2 for amendment in their bye-laws, the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies by order dated 04.08.2009 has deleted Borikalan as the operational area of the respondent No.2 which order has been confirmed by the Joint Registrar on 05.05.2010 as well as by the Cooperative Tribunal by order dated 24.10.2011 and therefore, the fishery lease...
M/S Oswal Chemicals and Fertilizer Ltd. Vs. the State of Madhya Prades ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
W.A.No.652 o24. 7.2012. Shri Kishor Shrivastava, Sr.counsel with Shri Shashank Verma for the appellants. Shri P.K.Kaurav, Dy.AG for the respondents. During the couRs.of hearing,we find that the matter can be sorted out by the parties if a revised proposal is made by the appellants to the State for waiver of the penalty and partial waiver of the interest part. Shri Kishor Shrivastava,learned Senot counsel submitted that this matter may be listed for hearing on 31.7.2012 so that he may also seek instructions in the matter. In view of the aforesaid, we adjourn hearing of this appeal for 31.7.2012. Shri P.K.Kaurav shall also seek instructions from the concerned Secretary in respect of the waiver of the penalty and partial waiver of the interest part. A typed copy of this order be supplied to Shri P.K.Kaurav for necessary action. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) Judge Judge Khan*...
Bhagwan Das Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABAPLUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K.Gupta,J.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1841 OF 199.Bhagwandas. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri B.J.Chourasiya, Advocate for the appellant. Shri G.S.Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 24th day of July, 2012) This criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 4/8/1998 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge Chhattarpur in ST No.177/1996 whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 436 of IPC and sentenced for one year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, two months' simple imprisonment in addition.2. Prosecution case, in short, is that in the night of 3rd and 4th Fe...
Avas Rahat Grih Nirman Sahkari Samiti Mydt. Vs. Shri Gyan Swaroop Bhat ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
1 W.P. No. 12330/2011 24.7.2012 Shri Madhur Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Piyush Bhatnagar, learned counsel for respondent. With consent the matter is heard finally. Controversy as to which size of plot the respondent would be entitled for has led the dispute rest before us vide this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, which is directed against the order dated 21.6.2011 passed by the M.P. State Cooperative Tribunal. Respondent, an octogenarian, who is a member of petitioner Society since its inception being aggrieved by non allotment of plot admeasuring 2400 sq.ft. (40 x 60), (he was offered the plot size 1500 sq.ft), raised the dispute under Section 65 of the M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The dispute was raised in furtherance to the liberty granted vide order dated 26.2.2009 passed in W.P. No. 11706/2007. The respondent lays his claim for a plot of ...
Deependra Thakare Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
WA 816/12 24.7.2012 Shri Sanjay K Agrawal, Advocate and Shri Pradeep Naveriya, Advocate for the appellant. I.A.No.9405/2012. By this application, appellant is seeking permission of this Court to correct the memo of appeal. Considering the averments made in I.A.No.9405/12, same is allowed. Necessary amendment be carried out in the memo of appeal during the couRs.of the day. Heard on admission. Issue show cause notice to the respondents. Notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 is accepted by Shri Vijay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General. Issue notice to respondent Nos.4 and 5. Steps within a period of three working days by Regd A/D mode. Notice be made returnable before next date of hearing. Be listed for hearing on 27.8.2012. As an ad-interim measure, it is directed that status-quo existing as on today in respect of the Panchayat Karmi of Gram Panchayat Lakhanwara, Tahsil Katangi, District Balaghat be maintained by the parties till next date of hearing. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla J...
S.K.Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
1....W.P.No.12 o24. 7.2012 Smt. Shobha Menon, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Rahul Choubey, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vijay Pandey, learned Dy. A.G.for respondents No.1 and 3. None for respondents No.2,4 and 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in compliance of the earlier order, today an affidavit has been filed by respondent No.2, 4 and 5, copy of which has been just received in the Court itself and prays for a short time to verify the fact stated in the affidavit. As the copy of the affidavit has been served on the petitioner in the Court itself, we adjourn hearing of this case for 6.8.2012. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt. Vimla Jain) Judge Judge vj...
Coal India Limited Vs. Badri Prasad Kewat
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
WA 1237/2011 24.7.2012 Smt Indira Nair, Senior Counsel with Shri Rajas Pohankar, Advocate for the appellant. Shri K.C.Ghildiyal, Advocate for the respondents. Smt.Indira Nair has shown us a copy of the order passed by the Apex Court on 16.7.2012 in which the Apex Court has directed thus:- ''Another four weeks' time is granted to the respondents to seek instructions as to whether their clients opt for either of the option for the purpose of employment. This would, in our opinion, finally settle the dispute between the parties''. Stating aforesaid, it is submitted by Smt. Indira Nair that not the matter has been taken up by the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court would decide the matter finally which of the policy (I) Policy of Coal India or (II) Policy framed by the State Government would be applicable in the matter. The respondents herein are seeking employment as a land oustee and as per the order passed by the Apex Court, they shall be entitled for employment. It is further submitted...
Pyarelal Ghongde Vs. the Secretary /Add. Secretary,
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.11268/2011 Pyarelal Ghongde. Vs The Secretary/Additional Secretary & otheRs.PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K.Trivedi.J.Shri Rajesh K. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Anoop Nair , learned counsel for respondents. ORDER ( .7.2012) 1: By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has claimed a relief of quashment of order dated 22.4.2010, by which the respondents have communicated the petitioner that he is not entitled to second higher grade pay scale because of the policy conditions, and a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the second higher grade pay scale to the petitioner from the date it has become due. It is contended by the petitioner that initially he was appointed as a cleaner in the establishment of respondents on 28.11.1975. He was appointed directly as a driver with effect from 28.10.1988. Since the petitioner has completed 9 years of service in the pay ...
Pooranlal Rajak Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
1 Cr.A. No.234/1997 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.234/1997 Pooranlal Rajak Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri G.S. Baghel, Advocate with Ms. Aparna Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Shri S.K. Kashyap, Government Advocate for the respondent/State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Passed on 24th day of July, 2012) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 6.1.1997 passed by the 6 th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T. No.483/1991, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294 & 307 of IPC and sentenced for one month S.I., one month R.I. and for three years R.I...
- ‹ Prev
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- Next ›
- Last »