Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
indira Gandhi Mahila Swasahayta Samooh Kudiya Vs. the State of Madhya ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
W.P.No.11531/2012 (Indira Gandhi Mahila Swasathya Samooh Kudiya versus State of MP and otheRs.03.08.2012 Heard Shri M.P.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the interim order of stay dated 16.07.2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Rewa Division, Rewa. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the same is without any jurisdiction. Be that as it may, as the matter is pending decision before the authority and this petition is against the interim order, therefore, the appropriate remedy in such cases of the petitioner is to approach the authority who has passed the order, by filing an application for vacating stay and if so advised, dismissal of the appeal. Apparntly, the petitioner has failed to do so and has directly approached this court. Accordingly, the petiti...
Municipal Council Nainpur Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
W.P.No.10953/2012 (Municipal Council, Nainpur..v...State of M.P.& otheRs.03.08.2012 Shri Mohan Sausarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only relief sought in the present petition is a direction to the respondent/police authorities as well as administrative authorities of Nainpur, District Mandla to provide police protection and aid in execution of the orders passed by the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Section 320(3)(ii) of the M.P.Municipalities Act, 1961. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that similar and identical petition (W.P.No.9593/2012) has been disposed of by this Court by order dated 2-7-2012 and in the circumstances the present petition be also disposed of in similar terMs.The learned Govt. Advocate submits that in case the petitioner r...
Surendra Singh Thakur Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
1 W.P.No.10292/2012 Surendra Singh versus Union of India & ORS.03.08.2012 Shri Maninder Singh Bhatti and Shri Sharad Gupta for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the procedure adopted by the respondent no.2 in allotting LPG Dealership. Admittedly, the petitioner has a remedy of approaching the Grievance Redressal Committee under Clause 14 of the Guidelines for Selection of Regular LPG DistributORS.Shri Kapil Jain learned counsel enters appearance on behalf of the respondents and submits that in case such a grievance is raised by the petitioner, the same would be decided by the committee under Clause 14 expeditiously. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Grievance Redressal Committee for mitigation of his grievance. It needs no emphasis to state that in case the petitioner approaches the Grievance Redressal ...
Ramcharan Dwivedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
CR.R.No.1482.12 03.08.2012 Shri R.K.Shrivastava, Advocate, for applicant. Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, Panel Lawyer, for respondent/State. Heard on I.A.No.16351/12 an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to applicant . Applicant has been convicted u/s 326 and 324 of IPC and sentenced to R.I.for one year with fine of Rs.500/- and R.I.for four months with fine of Rs.500/ -vide judgment and finding dated 11.10.2010 in Criminal Case no.2395/07 by J.M.F.C Beohari Dist Shahdol; in Cri. appeal No.113/10 vide judgment dated 27.7.12 of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) Beohari Dist Shahdol has dismissed the appeal by maintaining conviction and sentence. However, he was directed to appear on 7.8.2012 before the trial Court and he was not sent to jail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that fine amount has been deposited by applicant. He filed copy of judgment of the court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) Beohari Dist Shahdol. Looking to the nature...
Hari Sharan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
1 W.P.No.11833/2012 Hari Sharan Singh versus State of M.P.& ORS.03.08.2012 Heard Shri Mrigendra Singh learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 15.7.2012 by which he has been transferred from the Office of Block Education Officer, Sidhi to Govt. Higher Secondary School Khirkhori, District Sidhi, on the ground that the transfer is in violation of the policy of the State Government which requires and provides that as far as possible husband and wife should be posted together. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.Chaudhary versus State of M.P.and OtheRs.passed in W.A No.1131/2007, has already held and decided that in cases of breach of transfer policy, the appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to approach the authorities themselves in accordance with Clause 15 of the transfer policy. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of wi...
Municipal Council Nainpur Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
W.P.No.11602/2012 (Municipal Council, Nainpur..v...State of M.P.& otheRs.01.08.2012 Shri Mohan Sausarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only relief sought in the present petition is a direction to the respondent/police authorities as well as administrative authorities of Nainpur, District Mandla to provide police protection and aid in execution of the orders passed by the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Section 320(3)(ii) of the M.P.Municipalities Act, 1961. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that similar and identical petition (W.P.No.9593/2012) has been disposed of by this Court by order dated 2-7-2012 and in the circumstances the present petition be also disposed of in similar terMs.The learned Govt. Advocate submits that in case the petitioner r...
M/S Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
1 W.P.No.11029/2008 M/s Ruchi Soya Industries LTD.State of M.P.& another 1.8.2012 Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Counsel for petitioner. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy.GA for respondents. A) To declare the impugned Act viz Madhya Pradesh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 as originally enacted and amended from time to time as illegal and ultra vires and beyond the legislative competence of the State of Madhya Pradesh and to strike down the same as unenforceable. B) To restrain the respondents, their agents, servants and sub-ordinates from levying and/or recovering Entry Tax from the petitioner. C) To direct the respondent State of Madhya Pradesh to refund the tax collected so far and/or which may be collected by respondent State under the impugned Act with interest thereon @ 24% or any other rate as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court. D) To issue any other appropriate writ, direction or order which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances o...
M/S Krr Infra Projects (P) Ltd, Vs. Northern Coalfields Limited
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
1 W.P.No.4698/12 M/s KRR Infra Projects (P) Ltd Northern Coalfields LTD.& another 1.8.2012 Shri Rajesh Choudhary, Counsel for petitioner. Shri Greeshm Jain, Counsel for respondents. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that the petitioner has challenged the terms of tender process initiated by the respondents in this petition i.e.W.P.No.4698/12 and also in W.P.No.5471/12, though in respect of different tender, but subsequently petitioner has incorporated all these grounds in W.P.No.5471/12 which is a complete petition challenging the terms and conditions of tender process. It is submitted that petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to challenge/press all the grounds in W.P.No.5471/12. Shri Greeshm Jain, learned counsel for respondents has no objection, if the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty as prayed. In view of aforesaid, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty as prayed. No order as to...
Ram Gopal Rathore Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
Cr.R.No.1396/12 01.08.2012 Shri J.N.Tripathi, Adv.for applicants. Shri Akshya Namdeo, Panel Lawyer, for State. Heard on the point of admission. Perused the documents filed with petition. Petition seems to be argueable hence admitted for final hearing. Also heard on I.A.No15426/12 an application for stay further proceedings of ST No.119/11 pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Anuppur. Learned counsel for applicants submits that Radha bai wife of Ram Prasad committed suicide by hanging on 2.5.2011 at 10 a.m.as she was beaten, alleged with filthy word Chhinal. and asked to go and die. He further submits that act of applicants do not come under the definition of instigation u/s 107 or u/s 306 of IPC hence no offence u/s 306 of IPC is made out. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case I.A.No15426/12 is allowed and it is directed that the proceedings pending in ST No.119/11 before the Court of Sessions Judge, Anuppur shall remain stayed against the applicants till next date of h...
Raghunath Patel Vs. the Additional Collector
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
W.A.No.830 o1. 8.2012. Shri Anil Dwivedi for the appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.AG for the respondents No.1 and 2. Shri V.K.Upadhyay for respondent No.5. I.A.No.9049/12 for condonation of delay : There is delay of 5 days in filing this appeal. The main contesting party is respondent No.5 who had filed writ petition before the single Bench which was allowed. Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 has no objection if the delay of 5 days in filing this appeal is condoned and matter is heard on merits. In view of the aforesaid, I.A.No.9049/12 is allowed. The delay of 5 days in filing this appeal is condoned. Be listed for hearing for consideration of I.A.No.9048/12 in the next week. In the meantime, the respondents may file reply to I.A.No.9048/12 seeking stay of the effect of the order passed by the single Bench. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) Judge Judge Khan*...
- ‹ Prev
- 135
- 136
- 137
- 138
- 139
- 141
- 142
- 143
- 144
- 145
- Next ›
- Last »