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.
Smt. Vimla Pyasi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2012
W.P.No.4393 o16. 7.2012. Petitioner Smt. Vimla Pyasi along with Shri Harshit Patel, Advocate present. Shri P.K.Kaurav, Dy.AG for the State. Daughter of the petitioner namely; Ms.Arti has been produced by Lady Constable Smt.Sarita Shukla and Sub-Inspector Shri S.N.Tiwari of Police Station Gohalpur, Jabalpur, from Alpkalin Avas Grih, Jabalpur. Earlier the matter was referred for mediation. The Mediator settled the matter between the parties as per the settlement recorded on 2.7.2012, which is sent to this Court also. We explain the terms and conditions of the settlement to the petitioner Smt. Vimla Pyasi and also to Ms.Arti, daughter of the petitioner. They have agreed and has consented to the settlement arrived by the Mediator. In view of the aforesaid settlement arrived by the Mediator, we record the aforesaid settlement and dispose of the matter in terms of the settlement arrived by the Mediator. As per the settlement, not Ms.Arti shall reside with the petitioner Smt. Vimla Pyasi. Smt...
Banshilal Agrawal Vs. the Municipal Council Mandla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2012
1....F.A.No.298 o16. 7.2012 Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Counsel for the appellant. Shri Mohan Sausarkar, Counsel for respondents. As prayed by the appellant, hearing of this appeal is adjourned for a week so that he may address on the following issues involved in the matter :- 1. Whether the appellant could have raised construction beyond the map for which appellant hadsought permission of the Municipalities for the construction which was not considered by the Municipality for the statutory period and the appellant had raised construction on the basis of deemed permission.2. Whether the appellant was entitled for any relief in respect of the construction which was beyond proposed map for which appellant had moved an application for compounding. C.C.as per rules (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Vimla Jain) Judge Judge vj...
Svil Mines Limited Gudri Katni Vs. the Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2012
W.P.No.7872/2012, W.P.No.7920/2012, W.P.No.7930/2012 SVIL Mines Limited The Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore & others 16.7.2012 Shri G.N.Purohit, Senior Advocate with Shri Abhishek Oswal, counsel for petitioner. Shri P.K.Kaurav, Dy.A.G., for respondents. This order shall decide W.P.No.7872/2012, W.P.No.7920/2012 and W.P.No.7930/2012 arising out of similar set of facts. For the convenience, facts are taken from W.P.No.7872/2012. This petition is directed against an order of block assessment Annexure P-3 dated 12.3.2012 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Division No.2, Jabalpur, by which an assessment order has been framed against the petitioner and recovery of tax has been directed. It is stated that it is an ex-parte order and in view of the judgment passed by this Court in W.P.No.14103/2010 dated 4.11.2011, the order is without jurisdiction. It is not in dispute that against such an order a remedy of filing statutory appeal is provided under section 46 of the Madhya P...
Lafarge Dealers and ors Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2012
W.P.No.19140 of 2011 (O).WP No.19140/2011(O) WP No.5308/2004(O) WP No.2654/2006(O) WP No.1893/2007(O) WP No.2261/2007(O) WP No.2135/2008(O) 16.7.2012. Shri Mukesh Agrawal for the petitioner in W.P.No.19140/2011(O).Shri H.S.Shrivastava, Counsel assisted by Shri Sandesh Jain for the respondent No.5 in W.P.No.19140/2011(O) and for petitioners in W.P.No.5308/04(O).W.P.No.2654/2006(O).W.P.No.1893/2007(O) and W.P.No.2261/2007(O).As the controveRs.involved in all these cases are identical, all these petitions are being decided by this common order. For the convenience, facts are taken from W.P.No.19140/2011(O).The petitioner has sought the following relief : 7.1 to quash the assessment order dated 30.01.2006 (P/3).7.2 to quash the appellate order dated 12.04.2007 (P/5).7.3 to quash the revision order dated 23.06.2011 (P/7).7.4 to hold that notification dated 19/02/1991 (P/1) is still applicable; 7.5 to hold that no tax is payable by the petitioner in respect of purchases made between 2002-03 ...
The St. Josephs Convent Senior Secondary School. Jabalpur Vs. the Cant ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2012
W.P.No.9857/2012 (St. Josephs Con. Sr.S.School versus Cantonment Board & anr.) 13.07.2012 Heard Shri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the notice dated 12.05.2012 issued by the respondent Board requiring the petitioner to deposit property tax. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is an educational institution, admission to which are open to the general public and it is not deriving any income from the school and therefore, is exempted from payment of property tax under Section 111(2)(h) of the Cantonments Act, 2006. It is further submitted that in a similar petition filed by an adjourning school, i.e.W.P.No.5143/2011, this court has directed the respondent-Board to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner regarding exemption from property tax under the aforesaid provisions. It is stated that in the circumstances, similar direc...
Sigma Heavy Engineering Indutries Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Prem Narayan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2012
1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT JABALPUR (M.P.) Review Petition No.428/2011 SINGLE BENCH PRESENT : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. Solanki Sigma Heavy Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Prem Narayan and others ------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Ashish Shroti, Advocate for the applicant. Shri K.S. Wadhwa, Advocate for respondents No.1. Shri Vinot Mehta, Advocate for respondent No.2. None for Respondents No.3, though served. Shri C.K. Mishra, Govt. Advocate for the State. Date of hearing:09. 07/2012 Date of Judgment:13/07/2012 ORDER Applicant has preferred this petition/ application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for recalling the order dated 15.12.2010 passed in First Appeal No.218 of 2001 by this Court.2. It is undisputed on record that respondent No.2, Smt. Nathia Bai has filed a Civil Suit No.48-A/1992 against her cousin brothers, respondent No.1 Prem Narayan, respondent No.3 Oudh Narayan and others for declaration of her ti...
Mian Mohammad Akhtar Vs. Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2012
W.P.No.11492/2009 (Mian Mohammad Akhtar versus State of MP and otheRs.13.07.2012 Shri A. Zargar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Y.P.Tiwari, learned P.L.for the State. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the petition, the petitioner has expired and the term of suspension of the arms licence by the impugned order is also over and in such circumstances, petition has been rendered infructuous. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner's daughter-in-law has filed an application for transfer of licence which is pending before the authority and therefore, she be permitted to pursue the same. In view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of as infructuous. It is however, observed that the aforesaid disposal would not come in the way of decision on the application filed by the petitioner's daughter-in-law for transfer of licence which may be...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Prakash Jangre
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2012
1....W.A.No.732 o13. 7.2012 Parties present. It is submitted by Shri P.K.Kaurav, learned Dy. A.G.for the State that against the order passed by the Full Bench dated 17.2.2012 on Reference, four SLPs have been preferred before the Apex Court. A prayer is made on bahelf of the appellant and also on behalf of the State for grant of four weeks time to apprise this Court in respect of out come of the SLPs. The prayer is opposed by Shri P.N.Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 but considering the fact that the Supreme Court has re-opened on 2.7.2012 after Summer Vacation, we find it appropriate to allow further two weeks time to the appellant and for the State to apprise this Court in respect of out come of the SLPs. List for hearing in the 1st week of August,2012. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt. Vimla Jain) Judge Judge vj...
Jai Prakash Namdeo Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2012
1 W.A.No.585/2010 Jai Prakash Namdeo State of M.P.& others 13.7.2012 Shri N.S.Ruprah, Counsel for appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.A.G.for respondents. The record as directed earlier has not been produced by the State. An application-IA No.14583/11 has been submitted by the State for issuance of the direction as the record is seized by the Lokayukt and submitted that the State cannot produce the record. Shri N.S.Ruprah, learned counsel appearing for appellant submitted that it is not necessary to summon the record and the matter can be heard and decided without the record. He has tried to convince that inspite of earlier orders passed by this Court, even without the record, the matter can be heard as principle of natural justice has not been followed and the appellant has suffered because of non-following principle of natural justice. He insisted for hearing of the matter without the record. On 12.5.2011, this Court had directed the State to produce the record. Thereafter, on 16.3.2012...
Vinod Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Appeal No.71/2008 Vinot and another VERSUS State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Dinesh Tiwari, counsel for the appellant Vijay. Shri G.S.Thakur, on behalf of legal aid for the appellant Vinod. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 13th day of July, 2012) The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 24.11.2007 passed by learned Special Judge under NDPS Act, Sehore in Special Case No.120/2006, whereby the appellants were convicted for offence punishable under sections 8/21 (b) of NDPS Act and each sentenced for 7 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.20,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the appellants have to undergo for one year's additional rigorous imprisonment.2...
- ‹ Prev
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- Next ›
- Last »