Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
In Reference Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
CONC. 381/2013 22.02.2013 Shri P.K.Kaurav, learned Additional Advocate General, for the State of M.P.It is submitted by Shri Kaurav that he may be allowed four weeks time to seek instructions in respect of compliance of the order dated 04.12.2012 in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.38280/2012. It is also prayed by him that he may be served with necessary documents by the Registry so that the order may be complied with before the next date of hearing. In view of the aforesaid, office is directed to serve complete set of petition to Shri Kaurav within three working days so that he may take necessary steps for compliance of the order. In case, the order is not complied with, appropriate proceedings shall be initiated against the officeRs.who were party in the matter. Be listed for hearing on 08.04.2013. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (M.A.Siddiqui) Judge Judge psm...
Oriental Insurance Comp.Ltd. Vs. Smt.Rajkumari Bai and ors
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
1 C.R.No.668/2004 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K.Shrivastava Civil Revision No.668/2004 APPLICANT: Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Ahemdabad through the Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Divisional office No.1, 102/03, Kalachand Mansion, Bairasia Road, Bhopal (M.P.) Versus RESPONDENT:1. Smt. Rajkumari Bai w/o Ramshiromani Tiwari, aged about 40 yeaRs.R/o House No.85, Behind Ram Mandir, Chuna Bhatti, Kolar Road, Bhopal (M.P.) 2. Ramshiromani Tiwari, s/o Late Ramprakash Tiwari, aged about 49 yeaRs.R/o House No.85, Behind Ram Mandir, Chuna Bhatti, Kolar Road, Bhopal (M.P.) 3. Ku. Sushma Tiwari, D/o Ramshiromani Tiwari, aged about 14 years (minor) 4. Ku. Sashi Tiwari, D/o Ramshiromani Tiwari, aged about 12 years (minor) 4. Sudhir Tiwari, S/o Ramshiromani Tiwari, aged about 10 years (minor) Respondent Nos.3 to 5 minors through Ramshiromani Tiwari, s/o Late Ramprakash Tiwari, R/o House No.85, Behind Ram Mandir, Chuna Bhat...
Smt. Kiran Pathak Vs. Bhaskar Prasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
W.P.No.12732/12 22/02/13 Shri G.P.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. An application filed by the respondents for staying of the suit under Section 10 of C.P.C. having been allowed, this writ petition has been filed. Challenge is made to the order in question which is dated 10/07/12 passed by the FiRs.Civil Judge Class-I, Sidhi in Civil Suit No.76 A/2011. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is seen that the learned Court has recorded a finding that the dispute between the parties pertains to some property. The suit filed by the respondents being 31 A/2010 is pending involving same area and, therefore, finding the ingredients necessary for applicability of Section 10 C.P.C. having been established, the impugned order is passed. The order impugned passed staying the proceedings is a reasonable order and I see no reason to interfere into the same. The petition is therefore dismissed. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Vy/-...
Smt. Mullo Bai Vs. Karanlal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
W.P.No.829/13 22/02/13 Shri Pradeep Naveriya, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Challenging the order Annexure P-5 dated 17/12/12 passed by the Distt. Judge, Balaghat in Execution Case No.31/10 directing for sale of the property for recovery of the amount and distributing it amongst the parties, this writ petition is filed. Plaintiff/respondent has filed the suit in question for partition and declaration of his share in the suit property which was said to be joint suit property of the parties. The suit was registered as 4-A/10 and, therefore, the judgment and decree has been passed on 3/08/11 directing for partition of the suit property. Based on the decree passed, a commission was appointed for determining the share of the parties, its demarcation and valuation. Shri Alok Nema a Civil Engineer was appointed and it seems that parties did not agree for any proposal for partition. It seems that all the parties want front portion of the house and as physical partition of the property b...
Kedar Prasad Sharma Vs. Narmada Prasad Patel
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
Kedar Prasad Sharma versus Narmada Prasad Patel Writ Petition No.2741 22. 2.2013: Shri Kuldeep Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is made to an interlocutory order dated 5.2.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge Amarpatan, District Satna in Civil Suit No.02-B/2010 rejecting a prayer made by the petitioner for examination of certain signature by Hand-Writing Experts. It is contended that petitioner has filed suit in question for recovery of `2,98,000/-. Written statement has been filed and as the signature on the document namely the Rukka. (Promissory Note) is disputed, the application was filed to got the signature verified by a hand-writing expert, the same is rejected, this writ petition is filed. Shri Kuldeep Singh, learned counsel, inviting my attention to the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of L.S.Trading Company versus Manish Mishra 2010 (3) MPWN 2 and submits that...
Shri Krishn Malviya Vs. Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
1 WRIT PETITION NO.11675/2009 22.02.2013 Shri Pramod Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3. It is pointed out by learned Dy. Govt. Advocate appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 that in response to the queries raised by this Court in the order dated 13.9.2012, the return has already been filed and documentary evidence is produced. In view of the aforesaid, it is contended that the petitioner would not be entitled to any further relief. Looking to the controveRs.involved in the present petition and pendency of the departmental enquiry against the petitioner as alleged, it is deemed proper to dispose of this writ petition. The grievance of the petitioner is against the notice of recovery dated 6.4.2009 Annx.P/7. It is stated that he was working as Secretary of the Gram Panchayat and assessing certain loss, the recovery was ordered against the Secretary as also the Sarpanch and for the recovery the certifica...
Phool Singh Ahirwar Vs. Chief Conservator of Forest
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
1 W.P.No.919/2013 22.2.2013 Shri Satish Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. Petitioner is a owner of tractor and trolley bearing No.04 AH 107.and MP 04AH 0994. The tractor and trolley was confiscated and seized as it was found committing forest offence. Challenging the order of confiscation passed by the competent authority, appellate authority and the revisional authority exercising powers under Section 52 and 54 of the Indian Forest Act 1927 (M.P.Amendment) this writ petition has been filed. Shri Satish Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the tractor in question was never used for committing any officer, petitioner owner was not aware of the offence being committed and as in illegal manner the action is taken, he seeks for interference into the matter. On going through the record it is seen that on 6.1.2010 in forest beat compartment PF 15.a JBC Machine and athe tractor and trolle...
Ramratan Kushwaha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
Writ Petition No.2600/2013 22.02.2013 Mr.Rajendra Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. Heard. In this writ petition, the petitioner inter-alia seeks quashment of order dated 16.10.2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in pursuance of order of Commissioner dated 23.06.2011, the Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Niwari cancelled the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Village Employment Assistant and issued appointment in the name of respondent No.5, who has not even submitted an application initially. The petitioner has preferred an objection in this regard. However, by ignoring the objection preferred by the petitioner by an order dated 28.9.2012, the respondent No.5 has been appointed on the post of Village Employment Assistant. Admittedly, in para 5.2 of the scheme of the State Government for recruitment on the post of Village Employment Assistant, an appeal lies before District Progr...
Brijendra Singh Baghel Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
W.P.No.22694/2003 22.2.2013 Shri V.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Sheetal Dubey, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State. Shri Pradeep Dwivedi, learned counsel for the intervener. Learned Government Advocate again prays for time to comply with the order dated 20.11.2012. This Court specifically directed for production of the original record of the Screening Committee held in the year 2001 and 2009. The order was reiterated on 16.1.2013. Looking to the aforesaid, as a last opportunity, two weeks' time is allowed to learned Government Advocate to requisition the record and produce before this Court. In case the record is not produced by the next date of listing, the personal appearance of the respondent no.2 and 3 would be ordered to explain the default. List immediately after two weeks. Interim relief to continue till the next date of hearing. (K.K.Trivedi) JUDGE P/...
Ramesh Kachi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
Writ Petition No.2592/2013 22.02.2013 Mr.D.K.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents. Heard. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of order dated 26.12.2012, by which he has been placed under suspension. The petitioner also prayed for quashment of charge-sheet dated 18.1.2013. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was posted as Forest Guard in Beat Darodi, Range Vijayraghavgarh, Forest Division Katni. It is further submitted that a tiger died in an area which is situate adjacent to the area, of which the petitioner is Incharge. However, with a malafide intention, the respondent No.3 has placed the petitioner under suspension. It is also submitted that before issuing order of suspension, no enquiry has been held to find as to the involvement of the petitioner in the incident. It is further submitted that though the petitioner has been served the charge- sheet da...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »