Madhya Pradesh Court January 2013 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.
M/S Shiv Industries Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
W.P. No.7650/2006 31.01.2013 Shri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Dy. Advocate General for the State. Heard finally. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed to quash order of penalty Rs. 2,03,830/- imposed by Assessing Officer dated 04.10.2004 vide Annexure P-6, under Section 69 (2) of the M.P. Commercial Tax Act.2. In brief the facts of the case are that the petitioner is registered dealer under the provision of M.P. Commercial Tax Act, 1994 and is dealing in the business of manufacturing and sale of Water Cooler, Cooling Pump, Iron Almirah etc. The assessment of Commercial Tax for the period 01.04.1997 to 31.3.1998 was made by an order dated 25.5.2000 (Annexure P-5). On 12.06.1997, the business premises of the petitioner were inspected by the Commercial Tax Department/(respondents), the Books of account and other related documents were seized during the course of inspection. Petitioner asked for copies of ac...
Ram Krishna Vs. Raja Bhaiya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
1 S.A.No.421/1997 Ram Krishna Pandey & ORS.versus Rajabhaiya & ANo.30.01.2013 Shri Atulanand Awasthy learned counsel for the appellants. Shri S.K.Dwivedi learned counsel for respondent no.1. Heard on the question of admission. The appellants/defendants have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 08.05.1997 passed by the FiRs.Additional District Judge, Satna in Civil Appeal No.19-A/97 whereby the judgment and decree dated 24.1.1997 passed by the Civil Judge Class-II Satna, in Civil Suit No.217-A/96 has been set aside and the suit filed by the respondent no.1/plaintiff has been decreed. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the respondent no.1 had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of KhaSr.No.489, area 0.50 decimal situated in village Nibi, Tehsil Raghurajnagar, District Satna, in view of the fact that the Naib Tehsildar in Case No.4A-13/90-91 had passed orders under section 131 of the M.P.Land Revenue Co...
Julekha Bee Vs. Mohd. Fazal Habi Bulla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
Cr R No.980 o30. 01.2013 Shri Brijesh Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant. Smt. Juveriya Khan, learned counsel for the respondent. I am apprised by the applicant's counsel that he has filed some documents in support of the revision petition alongwith memo on 3rd of July 2012. On verification his submission is found correct. Having heard on the aforesaid memo, the annexed document, i.e.pay slip of respondent appears to be relevant with the matter, hence he same is taken on record. Also heard on IA No.15935/12, applicant's application permitting her to implead her daughter namely Nafisa Bee as the applicant no.2 on the array of revision memo. As per averments of IA initially on filing the impugned application before the trial court under Section 127 of Cr.P.C.aforesaid Nafisa Bee was impleaded as applicant No.2 but after passing the impugned order by the trial court, whereby the amount of her maintenance was enhanced from Rs.300/- to Rs.1000/- no revision was filed on her behalf fo...
Chetram Vs. Latu Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
1 S.A No.550/1997 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SECOND APPEAL NO.550/1997 APPELLANT : CHETRAM Vs. RESPONDENTS : LUTA SINGH AND OTHERS. Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice R.S. Jha. For the appellant : Shri L. D. S. Baghel, Advocate. For the respondents : Shri Avinash Patel, Advocate. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (31/01/2013) The appellant has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25.2.1997 passed by the Additional District Judge, Waraseoni in Civil Appeal No.3-A/96 affirming and confirming the judgment and decree dated 7.12.1983 passed by the Civil Judge Class-I, Waraseoni, in Civil Suit No.32-A/1977.2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, are that the respondent no.1/plaintiff Luta Singh filed a suit for declaring the sale deed dated 24.6.1974, executed by his brother Pooran Singh in favour of the appellant/defendant no.1, as null and void and not binding on h...
Smt. Guddi Bai Raikwar Vs. Babulal Raikwar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
1 Cr. R. 377/99 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR CRIMINAL REVISION NO.377/1999. Bhawani Singh Versus. State of Madhya Pradesh For the applicant : Shri Imtiaz Hussain, Advocate For the respondent/ State : Shri Punit Shroti, P. L. ORDER (ORAL) (31.1.2013) Per U. C. Maheshwari J.1. The applicant/ accused has preferred this revision being aggrieved by the judgment dated 18.2.1999 passed by Session Judge, Raisen in S. T. No.109/98, affirming the judgment dated 8.10.1998 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate Raisen in Criminal Case No.31/91 whereby the applicant was convicted and sentenced under Section 7 (1) r/w 16 (1) (a) (i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (In short the Act.), with a direction to undergo for six months RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of depositing the fine amount for further one month RI.2. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that on 13.10.1990 at about 8.00 O'clock in the morning the complainant Food Inspector R. K. Singh being a member...
Dr. Kaushal Shrama Vs. M.P.Bhoj (Open) University
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
Writ Appeal No.987/2012 31.1.2013 Shri D.S.Agnihotri, Advocate, for the appellant. Smt.P.L. Shrivastava, Advocate, for the respondents. Heard on admission. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 28.6.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.4821/2012 (S).Vide advertisement dated 5.9.2002 respondent no.2 M.P.Bhoj (Open) University through its Registrar invited applications for appointment to the posts of Lecturer on contract basis for a period of two yeaRs.In response to the advertisement, the appellant applied for his appointment. The appellant was then selected and appointed vide order dated 26.5.2003 as Lecturer on contract basis initially for a period of two yeaRs.The appointment was, however, extended from time to time. The Board of Directors of the M.P.Bhoj (Open) University finally in its meeting dated 6.8.2007 resolved that the contractual appointment shall not be extended after 30.9.2007. Therefore, after 30.9.2007 the services of appellant were...
M/S Subhash Contraction Company Vs. Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyu ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
M/S.Subhash Construction Co.versus Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co.LTD.& ORS.Writ Petition No.7656 31. 1.2013: Shri A. Usmani, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mukesh Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for respondent/State. Keeping in view the order passed under similar circumstances in W.P.No.5070/2011 (M/S.Jay Hanuman Stone Crusher versus Madhya Pradesh Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co.LTD.and OtheRs.on 9.1.2012 dismissing similar writ petitions, I see no reason to take a different view, as more than 25 petitions identical in nature have already been dismissed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. For the grounds and reasons already indicated in the case of M/S.Hanuman Stone Crusher in the order dated 9.1.2012 passed by a writ court, this petition is also dismissed. (Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-...
Jyoti Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
Cr R No.2158 o30. 01.2013 Shri D.K.Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri Punit Shroti, learned PL for respondent no.1-State. The applicants- victims have filed this revision being aggrieved by the order dated 13.8.2012 passed by the Upper Sessions Judge, Pipariya, district Hoshangabad in S.T.No.2/10 whereby their application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C.to implead the respondent Nos.7 to 10 as accused in the case alongwith respondent Nos.2 to 6 has been dismissed. In the couRs.of arguments on admission applicants' counsel submits that subsequent to filing of this revision, the trial of the impugned Sessions Trial has been concluded till the extent of existing accused, respondent Nos.2 to 6 by the trial court and no proceeding of such trial is pending before such court in the matter. In such circumstances, on asking the applicants' counsel that after concluding the trial of the case by trial court, how this revision could be entertained and adjudicated on merits because ...
M/S Kay Cee Aggregates Vs. Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
Mkay Cee Aggregates versus Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co.LTD.& ORS.Writ Petition No.7662 31. 1.2013: Shri A. Usmani, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mukesh Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for respondent/State. Keeping in view the order passed under similar circumstances in W.P.No.5070/2011 (M/S.Jay Hanuman Stone Crusher versus Madhya Pradesh Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co.LTD.and OtheRs.on 9.1.2012 dismissing similar writ petitions, I see no reason to take a different view, as more than 25 petitions identical in nature have already been dismissed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. For the grounds and reasons already indicated in the case of M/S.Hanuman Stone Crusher in the order dated 9.1.2012 passed by a writ court, this petition is also dismissed. (Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-...
Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2013
1 Writ Petition No. 1520/2013 31.1.2013 Shri Saurabh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard. Initially appointed as Assistant Registrar in State University Service Grade II, petitioner was confirmed in the service on 23.12.1988. Thereafter promoted as Deputy Registrar by order dated 12.10.1990 and confirmed on said post on 11.12.1997. On 25.9.2003 the petitioner was promoted as Registrar. Grievance of the petitioner that in spite of the recommendation by the University Grant Commission and acceptance thereof by the State Government for enhanced age of retirement of TeacheRs. Librarian, Sports Teachers and other Administrative Officers, the petitioner is being retired at the age of 60 years. The petitioner since belongs to State University Service his conditions of service including the age of superannuation are governed by Madhya Pradesh...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »