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.
Mehmood HussaIn Vs. Smt. Halimabano
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
CRR No.1513/2012 Criminal Revision No.1513/2012 11.1.2013 Shri P.C.Paliwal, counsel for the applicant. None for the respondent, though notice of this revision is served to the respondent and Shri Ashok Yadav, Advocate has filed the power on behalf of the respondent. However, Shri Ashok Yadav, Advocate did not appear on 4.1.2013 and today itself. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant finally. The applicant has challenged the order dated 5.7.2012 passed by the learned Principal Judge of Family Court, Jabalpur, whereby a sum of Rs.1,000/- was granted as interim maintenance to the respondent. After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and on perusal of the impugned order and documents submitted by the applicant, it is apparent that the applicant has not accepted that he is a handicapped person. He is shown to be a doctor by the respondent. However, he challenges that he is not a doctor. However, if monthly income of an unskilled labour may be counted then, maintenance of Rs....
Nipun Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
1 W.P.No.83/2013 Nipun Kumar Pandey State of M.P.& others 10.1.2013 Shri J.N.Tripathi, Counsel for petitioner. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy.GA for respondents. This petition is directed against an order dated 22.12.2012 Annexure P/14 passed by the Collector, Satna under Section 323 of the M.P.Municipalities Act, 1961 by which two resolutions of the Municipality dated 15.3.2002 and 26.3.2003 imposing toll tax- cum-passenger tax from the pilgrims for Chitrakoot have been suspended and the matter has been referred to the State Government for its confirmation. This order has been assailed by the petitioner on the ground that petitioner was given a contract by the municipality on 16.5.2012 to collect toll tax on particular dates, as are appearing in para 8 of the contract and without extending an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, such order has been passed, which may be quashed. In the alternatively, it was submitted that the petitioner may be allowed an opportunity to appear before the S...
Smt. Uma Agrawal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
W.A.No.928/2012 10.01.2013 Shri Ms.Neelam Goel, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, learned Dy. Advocate General for 1 to 4. Shri Rajendra Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent No.5. Heard on the question of admission. After arguing the matter for sometime, learned counsel for the appellant does not press this writ appeal and prays that the District Education Officer Narsinghpur be directed to decide the matter within a short time after remand. We accordingly direct the District Education Officer to take a decision within one month from the date the parties appear before him. Parties are directed to appear before the District Education Officer on 21.1.2013. The District Education Officer shall decide the matter afresh without being influenced by any observation made by the Joint Director Education. With the aforesaid direction, the writ appeal stands disposed of. (S.A.Bobde) (K.K.Trivedi) Chief Justice Judge. A.Praj....
Raksha Devi Vinayak and ors. Vs. Sheela Devi and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Second Appeal No.335/1997 Raksha Devi Vinayak and others Vs. Sheela Devi and another Present : Honble Mr. Justice R.S. Jha. For the appellants : Shri R.S. Tiwari, Advocate For the respondent : Shri R.K. Tiwari, Advocate. No.1. JUDGMENT (10.01.2013) The appellants have filed this appeal being aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 25.01.1997 passed by the 9th Additional Judge to the court of District Judge, Bhopal in R.C.A. No.111-A/94 by which the judgment and decree dated 24.10.94 passed by the 10th Civil Judge, Class-II, Bhopal in Case No.95-A/91 has been reversed.2. It is submitted that the appellant/plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she was the legally married wife of one Randhir Singh, Nazul Inspector who died on 29.03.1991 and the remaining appellants were his sons and daughters. It was also claimed in the suit that the appellant No.6 be declared to be entitled to 2 compassionate appointment in lieu of the deat...
Shubham @ Sonu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
M.Cr.C.No.14772/2012 10/01/2013 Shri Imtiaz Hussain, Advocate for the applicant. Shri P.K.Chourasiya, PL for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.217/12 registered at P.S.Silwani, District Raisen for the offence punishable under section 306 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that none of the ingredient u/s 107 of IPC is found in the allegation made against this applicant and no case is made out u/s 306 of IPC. He is ready to co-operate in further investigation and there is no possibility of his absconding. Applicant is a young boy aged about 18 years and studying in Class XIIth. In the event of arrest his reputation as well as career will be affected adversely therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to ...
Virendra Kumar JaIn Vs. Shri A.F. Naqvi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
1 Conc. No.2078/2012 Virendra Kumar Jain Shri A.F.Naqvi 10.1.2013 Shri Gaurav Sharma, Counsel for petitioner. This contempt petition is directed alleging disobedience of the order dated 29.9.2010 in Writ Appeal No.943/2010 by which a Division Bench of this Court had disposed of the matter by an order which reads thus:- We are of the considered opinion that the writ petition preferred by the appellant was not maintainable for the reason that the appellant has remedy under the Right to Information Act, 2005 as well as before the Bank Ombudsman. Thus, in view of availability of alternative remedy, the writ petition filed by the appellant was not maintainable. We, therefore, do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. However, in case the appellant has any grievance against the respondent-Bank, his remedy lies in approaching the Banking Ombudsman. We have no manner of doubt that in case the appellant approaches the Banking Ombudsman and submit a c...
Ram Shiromani Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.1023/2010 Ram Shiromani, son of Ram Kripal Awasthi, aged about 40 years, resident of village Sarai Sengar P.S. Laur, Distt. Rewa Appellant vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, through SHO, P.S. Laur, Distt. Rewa Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Hemant Sen, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, P.L. for the respondent/State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (10.1.2013) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment- dated 4.5.2010 passed by Special Judge [under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act), Rewa in Special Case No.3/09 whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default...
M/S Col. Gas Service Vs. Collector Jabalpur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
1 Criminal Revision No.403/2011 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL REVISION NO.403/2011 M/s. Col. Gas Service A.F.R. Vs. Collector, Jabalpur. JUDGE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Anshul Dixit, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri G. S. Thakur,Panel Lawyer for the respondent. ORDER (Passed on 10th day of January, 2013) The petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 23/11/2010 passed by the XVth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Criminal Appeal No.357/2008 by which the order passed by the Collector, Jabalpur in Revenue Case No.88- B/121/07-08 was maintained by which it was directed that 70 gas cylinders be confiscated and their cost be deposited by the petitioner. Hence the petitioner has challenged both the orders passed by the Courts below.2. The prosecution's case in short is that the petitioner is a dealer of cooking gas Indane auth...
Somnath Choudhary Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SB: HON. SHRI N.K.GUPTA,J.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.2114/2012 Somnath Choudhary. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Ramakant Tiwari, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Punit Shroti, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 10th day of January, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC vide judgment dated 9.12.2011 passed by the CJ.Narsinghpur in Criminal Case No.2530/2006 and sentenced with rigorous imprisonment of three years with fine of Rs.1,000/-. In Criminal Appeal No.5/2012 the learned Additional Judge to the First Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur vide judgment dated 11.10.2012 dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved with both the judgments, the applicant has filed the present revision.2. Th...
Rajendra Kumar Mahajan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No :5821. of 2006(s) Rajendra Kumar Mahajan - V/s - State of MP and Another Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. Honble Shri Justice Alok Aradhe. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Pranay Verma, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, Panel Lawyer, for respondent No.1. Shri V.S.Shroti, Senior Advocate, with Shri Vikram Johri for respondent No.2. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether approved for reporting: Yes / No.ORDER 10/01/2013 As per Rajendra Menon, J :- Petitioner, who has been compulsorily retired under the provisions of Rule 14(2) of the MP Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994, has filed this writ petition challenging his compulsory retirement ordered on 20.4.2005 vide Annexure P/8. 2- At the relevant time when the impugned action was taken, petitioner w...
- ‹ Prev
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- Next ›
- Last »