Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.Varsha Khatri Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
W.P.No.16029/2012 (Smt. Varsha Khatri versus State of M.P.& ors.) 26.09.2012 Smt. Varsha Khatri, petitioner present in person. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner, who is present in person submits that the respondent Nos.4 and 5 are harassing her and inspite of several complaints, no action has been taken by the police authorities. Looking to the dispute in the matter, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2, Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur to refer the matter of the petitioner to Pariwar ParamaRs.Kendra and make all efforts to get the matter resolved and take any other steps, if necessary. 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...
Golu Raikwar and ors. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR DIVISION BENCH Criminal Appeal No.1797/2004 1. Golu Raikwar, s/o Shri Sunderlal Raikwar, aged about 18 years, Student, r/o New Gokalpur, Ranjhi, Jabalpur.2. Bhura @ Anil, s/o Shri Sunderlal Raikwar, aged about 18 years, Student, R/o New Gokulpur, Ranjhi. Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh through Police Station Ranjhi, district Jabalpur. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For the Appellants: Shri R.K. Shukla, Advocate. For the Respondent: Shri Amit Pandey, Panel Lawyer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PRESENT: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH SAKSENA HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE T.K. KAUSHAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date of hearing:20. 09/2012 D...
Shyamdas Shivhare Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1012/1997 Shyamdas Shivhare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ........................................................................................................... For the appellant : Shri Sankalp Kochar, Advocate. For the respondent: Shri S. K. Kashyap, Public Prosecutor. ........................................................................................................... JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 26th day of September, 2012) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 7.5.1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Umariya in ST. No.194 of 1994 whereby the appellant was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 323, 338 of I.P.C and sentenced for one years rigorous imprisonment and two years rigorous imprisonment respectively. Both the sentences to run concurrently.2. The prosecution's case, in short, is that the appel...
Bhaskar Dutt Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No :6483. OF 200.Bhaskar Dutt Pandey V/s The State of M.P. & Another Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri D.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for respondents. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER 25.9.2012 Interalia contending that petitioner was appointed as a Section Writer and his services have been terminated vide order dated 28.10.2003 without hearing him and without granting him any opportunity, petitioner has filed this writ petition.2. Facts that has come on record indicates that petitioner was appointed as Section Writer by the Collector Rewa on temporary basis vide order Annexure P-2 on 14.10.1980. It may be taken note of that in the State of Madhya Pradesh in various Districts Section Writers ...
M/S R.C. Saxena and Company Vs. Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwavidhyala ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
W.P.No.14828/2012 25.09.2012 Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Having heard on the question of admission, it is directed that on payment of PF alongwith requisite of registered post within three days, the notice against admission of this petition as well as IA No.11798/12, an application for grant of stay against further proceeding of the trial court, returnable within six weeks be issued to the respondent, failing which this petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Bench. As an interim measure till next hearing of this petition the further proceeding of RCS No.168/2010 pending in the court of XIXth ADJ.Jabalpur is hereby stayed. C c as per rules. (U.C.Maheshwari) Judge bks...
Anantram Vs. Narayan Das
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
1 SA No.118/1997 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR. Second Appeal No.118/1997 APPELLANTS : Anantram s/o. Munnalal Mehdele - Versus - RESPONDENT : Narayan Das s/o. Govind Raikwar For the Appellant : Shri G.S. Baghel, Advocate alongwith Shri Abhay Raj Singh, Advocate None for the respondent. Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice Alok Aradhe. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (25.09.2012) This appeal is by the plaintiff which was admitted on the following substantial question of law : Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the lower appellate Court was right in reversing the decree of the trial Court on the ground that it has not been proved that Ex. P/1, the contract for sale of the suit property has not been executed ?..2. The facts, giving rise to filing of the appeal, briefly stated, are that the plaintiff filed the suit on the ground that the defendant entered into an agreement wit...
Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
W.P.(s).No.3667/2005 25.09.2012 Shri P.K.Asati, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents No.1 and 4. Shri T.K.Khadka, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3. The relief claimed by the petitioner is for payment of Rs.5000/- per month towards the part of the salary which the respondents No.2 and 3 are required to pay. Though a return is filed but that will not justify withholding of the said part of the salary of the petitioner, merely because a litigation is pending in the Apex Court where an interim relief is granted. Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 is directed to seek instructions in this respect. List the petition in the week commencing 1st October, 2012 along with W.P.No.5595/2009. (K.K.Trivedi) Judge b...
Deepali Singhai (Jain) Vs. Madhya Pradesh Professional Examination Boa ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
Deepali Singhai Vs.MP Professional Examination Board W.P.No.16215/2011 25/09/2012 Shri Mahendra Pateriya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner was a candidate, who had appeared in the examination conducted by the respondents' board for appointment on the post of Samvida Shikshak Patrata Pariksha Varg 2.Grievance of the petitioner is that in the examination conducted, various discrepancies in the questions were noticed particularly with regard to Question No.27 and 150 and petitioner has submitted a representation before the respondents. Considering the fact that the objections to the questions are still pending before the Respondent/Board, the Respondent/Board is directed to decide the same in accordance with law within a period of four weeks and take consequential action. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed of. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd...
Smt. Aruna Tirpude Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
W.P.No.16142/12 (s) 25/09/12 Smt. Gulab K. Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner is working as a 'Teacher' in Govt. Middle School Linga, Distt. Balaghat. By the impugned order Annexure P-1 dated 13/07/12, petitioner has been transferred to Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School, Khairlangi in the same district of Balaghat. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that petitioner's husband is a Govt. employee. He is posted in the Department of Higher Education and is posted in Baihar. Petitioner is being transferred to a place which is far away from Baihar and pointing out that the transfer disturbs the family setup of the petitioner in as much as, husband and wife is posted at the far off place. That apart, certain personal inconveniences due to ailment of petitioner's mother has been pointed out for assailing the impugned order. Keeping in view the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner, i...
Jamunadas Vadhwani Vs. Smt. Bhagwanti Devi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
1 W.P.NO.14757/12(I).25.9.2012. Shri A.K.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on IA No.12071/12, petitioner's application for taking additional documents on record. The same appears to be relevant with the matter, hence by allowing the IA the annexed documents are taken on record. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 31.8.2012 (Ann. P.1) passed by 19th Civil Judge Class-II, Bhopal in Co.No.349-A/12 whereby allowing the application of respondents filed under Section 13 (6) of M.P.Accommodation Control Act (In short the Act.) (it appears that it is wrongly mentioned under Order 13 Rule 6 of CPC in the petition).the petitioner/ defendant has been directed to deposit the entire arrears of the rent of the desputed premises within fifteen days with a further direction to deposit the monthly recurring rent before 15th day of every Gregorian calender months, failing which the defence of the petitioner available under...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »