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.
Ramesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs. Smt. Shhela Devi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
W.P.No.8021/2011 (R.K.Kushwaha and others versus Smt. Sheela Devi and otheRs.23.07.2012 Shri G.S.Ahluwalia, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri R.P.Agrawal, learned senior counsel with Shri Santosh Yadav, for the respondents. Heard. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 27.04.2011 passed by 3rd Additional District Judge, Satna in Civil Suit No.2-A/08 whereby the application filed by the petitioners/defendants seeking a direction to the plaintiff to furnish bank guarantee in respect of the land in question, has been rejected. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents/plaintiffs in breach of the injunction as well as specific order for furnishing security has sold out the land in question which has infact been purchased by a lawyer who is practising in the court and who stood as a surety and in such circumstances, the petitioners had filed an application seeking a direction for production of bank guarantee. The ...
M/S Akanksha Constructions Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Developmen ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
1 W.P.No.10101/2012 W.P.No.10102/2012 23.7.2012 Shri Sudhir Shrivastava, Counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.A.Dharmadhikari, Counsel for respondent No.2. This order shall decide W.P.No.10101/12-Arun Shrivastava versus Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation LTD.& another and W.P.No.10102/12-M/s Akanksha Constructions versus Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation LTD.& another in which similar prayer is made on the basis of similar set of facts. For the convenience, facts are taken from W.P.No.10101/12. Petitioner has sought following reliefs:- It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court be please to direct the respondent No.1 to decide the representations submitted by the petitioner regarding the settlement and liability of the Service Tax, in the interest of justice. The case of the petitioner is that in respect of imposition of service tax, petitioner is having some grievance and in this regard, petitioner had made a representation with respondent No.1. It w...
M/S Ccpl-amrcl (Joint Venture Company) Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Writ Petition No.6505/2012 23.7.2012 Shri Kishore Shrivastava, Senior Advocate, with Shri Prem Francis and Shri Kapil Jain, Advocates, for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General, for the State/respondent no.1. Shri Shobhit Aditya with Shri A.K.Singh, Advocates, for respondent nos.2 and 3. Heard on admission. By this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has essentially prayed for quashing of order dated 18.4.2012, Annexure P15, passed by respondent no.3 Chief General Manager (FS).Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Limited, Bhopal, whereby its contract has been terminated. Petitioner M/S.CCPL-AMRCL is a joint venture company. It is engaged in the business of infrastructure, construction, mining, irrigation, etc.Respondent no.2 Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Limited, Bhopal is a wholly owned Government of Madhya Pradesh undertaking. Respondent no.3 is the Chief General Manager (FS) of the Madhya Prade...
Shivkant Dixit Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
1 W.P.No.10920/2012 W.P.No.10920/2012 23/07/2012 Shri Anubhav Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned PL on advance notice for the respondents/State. Petitioner is working as Revenue Inspector and is posted in Katni. By the impugned order dated 15.7.2012, many persons have been transferred and petitioner has been transferred from Katni to Badwani. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been transferred to a place which is more than 726 Km far from the present place of posing whereas, most of the persons are posted in nearby districts. Inviting my attention to the impugned order dated 15.7.2012 Sr.No.86 onwards, it is stated that most of persons are posted in nearby districts like Bhopal, Satna, Hoshangabad etc.and it is only in the case of the petitioner that he has been transferred to a place which is 726 km far. Pointing out that the petitioner has submitted the representation with regard to change of his posting, request made in this writ petition ...
Raj Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
23.07.2012. Shri Vipin Yadav for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer, for the respondents on advance notice. Petitioner was working as a Guruji and on the ground that he has remained unauthorizedly absent, his services were terminated. Interalia contending that before terminating his service, no notice was issued to the petitioner, no opportunity of hearing was granted and the termination is illegal, this writ petition has been filed. Respondents have filed reply and point out that petitioner, who was working as a Guruji, was unauthorizedly absent from 15.1.2002 to 20.1.2002, his whereabouts were not known and, therefore, his appointment as Guruji was terminated. Respondents have also raised an objection to the effect that in the Center where the petitioner was working another Guruji has been appointed and, therefore, there is no provision for appointing the petitioner again. Accordingly, they contend that petitioner himself admits about his absence, no further oppor...
Arun Shrivastava Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporat ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
1 W.P.No.10101/2012 W.P.No.10102/2012 23.7.2012 Shri Sudhir Shrivastava, Counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.A.Dharmadhikari, Counsel for respondent No.2. This order shall decide W.P.No.10101/12-Arun Shrivastava versus Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation LTD.& another and W.P.No.10102/12-M/s Akanksha Constructions versus Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation LTD.& another in which similar prayer is made on the basis of similar set of facts. For the convenience, facts are taken from W.P.No.10101/12. Petitioner has sought following reliefs:- It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court be please to direct the respondent No.1 to decide the representations submitted by the petitioner regarding the settlement and liability of the Service Tax, in the interest of justice. The case of the petitioner is that in respect of imposition of service tax, petitioner is having some grievance and in this regard, petitioner had made a representation with respondent No.1. It w...
Smt.Pooja Chawla Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
W.P.No.9651/2012 (Smt. Pooja Chawla versus State of M.P.& Ors.) 23.07.2012 Heard Shri A. Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the police authorities are not looking into the complaint of the petitioner regarding theft of her car. In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to look into the complaint of the petitioner and deal with it in accordance with law. To enable the authority to do so, a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition be served upon him by the petitioner. With the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. C.C.as per rules. (R.S.Jha) Judge gn...
Vikaram Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
W.P.No.11112/2012 23.7.2012 Shri V. P. Nema, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev K. Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner is working as Senior Agriculture Development Officer and is posted in Block Bari, District Raisen. By the impugned order dated 13.7.2012 petitioner is transferred to District Mandla and challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that petitioner has No. completed his tenure posting of three years and therefore, transfer is contrary to transfer policy. It is also stated that in the year 2002 petitioner was working in Mandla and now in transferring him back to district Mandla transfer policy is violated. Apart from challenging the transfer order in violation of transfer policy, no other statutory rules or regulations are shown to be violated nor any malafide made out. Merely becaus...
M/S Ravi Kapoor Vs. Divisinal Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax,
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
VATA 3...
M/S K.N. International Ltd. Incorporate Under the Companies Act 1956 H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
W.P.No.10209/2012 M/s K.N.International LTD.State of M.P.& others 20.7.2012 Shri Tribhuvan Mishra, counsel for petitioner. Shri P.K.Kaurav, Dy.A.G., for respondent nos.1 to 3. The petitioner has sought following reliefs :- (A) Issue a writ of appropriate nature quashing and setting aside the impugned order Annexure P-2 dated 27.10.2011 by declaring that the petitioner is not liable to pay cess under the Cess Act and the Cess Rules. (B) Such further or other relief(s) as the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances stated hereinabove and ; (C) Costs of this petition may also be awarded. Learned counsel for petitioner at the outset submitted that identical matter W.P.No.2198/2012 (M/s Simplex Infrastructure LTD.versus State of M.P.and otheRs.has been entertained by a Division Bench of this Court and this petition which is filed on similar grounds may also be entertained. The aforesaid position is not disputed by Shri Kaurav. In M/s Simplex Infrastructure Ltd (su...
- ‹ Prev
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- Next ›
- Last »