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.
Dharmoo @ Dharmendra Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
1 M.Cr.C No.5859/2011 22/2/2013 Shri Abhay Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri V.P.Tiweari, Panel Lawyer for the respondent / State. Record of Case No.468/2011 State of M.P.versus Dharmendra @ Dhrmoo under Section 379 of IPC pending in the Court of JMFC, Gadarwara has been received. This application has been preferred by the petitioner for transfer of the case from the Court of JMFC Gadarwara to the Court of Railway Magistrate, Jabalpur, on the ground that petitioners are facing trial in one case of similar nature in the Court of Railway Magistrate, Jabalpur. Hence, the aforesaid case may be transferred for the sake of convenience of the petitioners as well as of the witnesses. According to the petitioneRs.a case has been registered against them on 7.12.2010 for committing theft in train going from Patna to Sikandrabad and another case has been registered on 16.1.2011 for committing theft in Amarkantak 2 M.Cr.C No.5859/2011 Express by respective official Police Station and ...
Ramniwas Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
Second Appeal No.174/2013 (Ramniwas versus State of MP) 22.02.2013 Heard Shri P. Pareekh, learned counsel for the appellant on the question of admission. The appellant has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 26.11.2012 passed by the FiRs.Additional District Judge, Panna in Civil Appeal No.15-A/2011 whereby the judgment and decree dated 04.01.2011 passed by the 1st Civil Judge, Class-II, Panna in Civil Suit No.36-A/2008 has been confirmed and affirmed and the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of khaSr.No.600/1 new No.575/3 area 0.47 hectare and khaSr.No.575/4 area 0.34 hectare situated at village Joori, Tahsil Gunnour District Panna has been dismissed. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the suit was filed by the appellant in the year 2007 praying for declaring the order dated 08.05.2000 passed by the Collector and order dated 28.10.2006 passed by the Additional Com...
Mst. Shabana Anjum Vs. Mohd. Islam
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
1 W.P.No.457/2013 22/2/2013: Shri M. Aadil Usmani, learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an interlocutory order Annexure P/6 dated 20.12.2012 passed by the Civil Judge Class I, Maihar District Satna in Regular Civil Suit No.2-A/2012 closing the right of the petitioner for leading evidence on the ground of adjournment being granted. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that one opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to keep the witnesses present and examine them as if such opportunity is not being granted the possibility of remanding the matter back cannot be ruled out. Keeping in view the aforesaid it is directed that on the petitioner's filing certified copy of this order along with particulars of the witnesses to be examined in the Court below on 4th March 2013, the learned Court below shall fix a date for recording the evidence on which date petitioner shal...
Sandeep Gond Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
W.P.No.18042-12 22-02-2013 Shri Ashok Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has filed an application for correction of revenue record which is pending before the respondent no.3 since 07-09-2011. Keeping in view the aforesaid, it is directed that on the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order alongwith relevant record, respondent no.3 shall decide the application for correction pending under section 111 of the M.P.Land Revenue Code after hearing all concerned in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. C.C.as per rules. (RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE hsp...
Ramesh Chandra Vs. Smt. Ram Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
1 C.R.No.399/2011 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava Civil Revision No.399/2011 APPLICANT: Ramesh Chandra aged about 40 years, S/o Shri Pyarelal Koshal (Teacher), R/o Lodhi Mohalla, Timarni, Tah.Timarni, District Rewa (M.P.) Versus RESPONDENT: Smt. Ram Bai, Aged about 50 years, W/o Shri Laxmi Narayan Koshal, R/o Lodhi Mohalla, Timarni, District Rewa (M.P.) Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri K.S. Rajput , learned counsel for the respondent. ORDER (21.02.2013) 1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 24.09.2011 passed by learned Special Judge, Harda in C.A. No.02-B/2011, whereby the appeal of applicant-defendant has been dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by learned Second Civil Judge Class II, Harda in C.S. No.1- B/2010 dated 16.09.2010 has been affirmed, this revision application has been filed by the defendant-applicant. 2 C.R.No.399/2011 2. In brief, the suit of plaintiff-respondent i...
Shri Harish Khandelwal Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
W.P.No.5326/12 21/02/13 Smt. Sneh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is seen that challenge in this writ petition is made to a certain auction conducted by the D.R.T. for recovery of loan under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets Act. Even though, an award has been passed by the D.R.T. directing for imposing a liability of Rs.34,00,000/- along with counsel's fee of Rs.3750/- on the ground that petitioner has not discharged the liability and loan has not been deposited. The impugned action for recovery has been initiated. Petitioner has filed various documents Annexures P-1, P-2 and P-3 which goes to show that immediately after the notice of auction was published, petitioner approached the Bank and submitted that a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- as 50 % of the amount decreed has already been deposited and they are willing to deposit the remaining amount but nothing is done and it is stated that property has been sold...
Harishankar Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Revision No.666/1999 Harishankar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Ashutosh Tiwari, counsel for the applicant. Shri Vinot Fauzdar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on 21st day of February, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC vide judgment dated 17.12.1998 passed by the learned J.M.F.C. (Shri P.L. Dinker), Burhanpur in criminal appeal no.448/1994 and sentenced for one years R.I. with fine of `5,000/-. In criminal appeal no.9/99, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Burhanpur vide ...
Surendra Kumar Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
M.Cr.C. No.701/2013 21.2.2013 Shri A.P. Singh, counsel for the applicant. Shri Puneet Shroti, PL for the respondent/State. Heard. This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 95/2012 registered at Police Station, Raipur Karchuliyan District Rewa for offence punishable under Sections 341, 294, 327, 323, 506B, 34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He has no criminal past. As per prosecution, the coaccused Lukky Patel, Mister Patel and Guddu Patel exhorted the money from the complainant. The applicant is not find place in the FIR. The applicant is U.D.T and the event of arrest, his services would be adversely affected, therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Learned counsel for the State has objected ...
Malkhe Jawre Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
W.P.No.3985/2009(S) 21.02.2013 Shri Dinesh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for respondents. In terms of order dated 28.1.2013, return has been filed. The personal appearance of the Commissioner Public Instructions, M.P., was exempted in view of the filing of the return and, therefore his personal appearance is not necessary. The return indicates that certain calculations were done and according to the chart submitted by the respondent as Annx.R/1, the petitioner was entitled to payment of 56 days of leave encashment which has already been done vide order dated 18.2.2003 passed by the District Education Officer, Chhindwara. However, the chart nowhere indicates as to how only 56 days were available in the leave account of petitioner for leave encashment. Let the additional affidavit be filed in this respect within three weeks. List immediately thereafter. (K.K.Trivedi) Judge. A.Praj. W.P.No.3985/2009(S)...
Amim Ahmed Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
M.Cr.C. No.665/2013 21.2.2013 Shri Atul Upadhyay, counsel for the applicant. Shri Puneet Shroti, PL for the respondent/State. Heard. This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 649/2012 registered at Police Station, Burhar District Shahdol for offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 294, 506B/34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He has no criminal past. Applicant is husband of Shama Parveen, complainant. It is a case of matrimonial case wherein in the event of arrest of applicant, the possibility of compromise between them will be diminished. The applicant is a reputed person of the society and in the event of arrest, his reputation would be tarnished, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »