Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
Dadu Vs. Motilal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
1 W.P. No. 7316 Of 2011 20.3.2013 Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Ojha, learned counsel for respondent No. 1. None for other respondents. Heard. Order dated 17.3.2011 passed by II Civil Judge, Class II, Waidhan district Singrauli in Civil Suit No. 50 A/2009 is being assailed vide this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. By impugned order the Trial Court closed the right of the petitioner/plaintiff to lead evidence. The suit at the instance of petitioner is for declaration of title in respect of land bearing Khasra Nos. 118/4, 128/1, 130, 131, 169 situated in Waidhan, district Singrauli. On 17.3.2011 faced with certain difficulties in producing his witnesses petitioner/plaintiff filed an application under Order 17 Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking adjournment. The Trial Court taking into consideration the earlier adjournments rejected the petitioner/plaintif...
Naresh Kachhi Vs. Smt. Mamta Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
Cr.R.No.1665/2012 20.3.2013 Shri Brajesh Choubey, counsel for the applicant. Shri Deepak Singh, counsel for the respondents. Heard on admission. The applicant has challenged the order dated 24.7.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Katni in Criminal Revision No.32/2012 whereby a maintenance of Rs.800/- was granted to the respondent no.1 and maintenance of Rs.1000/- was granted to the respondent no.2 by modifying the order dated 19.1.20012 passed by the JMFC, Katni in MJ.No.11/2010 in which a maintenance of Rs.600/- was given to the respondent no.2 whereas the maintenance application of the respondent no.1 was dismissed. Before the JMFC, Katni the respondents have moved an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C dependent upon the various grounds. The applicant in his reply denied all the allegations and he has pleaded that apart from all his efforts, he could not bring his wife to his house. After considering the evidence adduced by the parties the learned JMFC, Katni dismissed t...
Vista Organics Private Limited Vs. Chairman
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
W.P.No.9279/2007 20.03.2013 Shri Dharmendra Soni, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Jaideep Singh, Advocate for the respondents. I.A.No.4046/2013 for issuance of appropriate direction. The respondents have attached various properties vide attachment order dated 27.02.2013 and same properties have been handed over to the petitioner in Supurdginama. The contentions of the petitioner are that the properties belong to some other person and petitioner was only doing the job work and the properties belong to a third party namely M/s Resonance Speciality LTD.Tarapur could not have been attached. It is further submitted that the respondents may auction the aforesaid properties, so till the next date of hearing, the respondents may be restrained from auctioning the properties attached. Shri Jaideep Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents prays for a short time to file reply to the aforesaid application. Prayer is allowed. Be listed for hearing on 03.04.2013. Till next date of heari...
Manohar Pal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
1 M. Cr.C.No.9376/2011. 20.3.2013 . Shri Amit Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Pramod Chourasia, learned PL for the respondent No.1. Shri A.T.Faridi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioneRs.accused have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of the FIR registered as Crime No.276/2011 at Police Station Adhartal, Jabalpur against them for the offence punishable under Section 448, 408 and 34 of IPC. As alleged the applicants being Bank Officers in connection of recovery of some loan transaction went to the house of the complainant respondent No.2 and attached the same along with some other property as stated in the FIR. As per further allegations they have committed the offence of misappropriation and breach of the trust with respect of such property and in such circumstances the FIR was lodged by the respondent No.2 against them, on which the offence of Section 448, 408 and 34 of IPC was registered a...
Bhairo Singh Vs. Gulab
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
(1) Civil Revision No.788/2003 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava Civil Revision No.788 / 2003 Applicant : Bhairo Singh, S/o. Ganpat Singh Yaduvanshi, R/o. Village Chhidgaon Mouzi, Tehsil Nasrullahganj, District Sehore (M.P.) Vs. Respondent : Gulab, S/o. Ram Prasxad Sahu, R/o. Chhidgaon Mousi, Tehsil Nasrullahganj, District Sehore (M.P.) ________________________________________________________ Shri Sameer Seth, Advocate for applicant. Smt. Sarita Chourasiya, Advocate for respondent. _________________________________________________________ ORDER ( 20/03/2013) This revision application under Section 115 CPC has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2003 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Nasrullahganj District Sehore in Civil Appeal No.7-B/1999 whereby judgment and decree dated 06.10.1998 passed by learned Civil Judge, Class-II, Nasrullahganj in Civil Suit No.9-B/1998 has been reversed ...
Krishan Deo Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
Criminal Revision No.1284/2009 20.03.2013 Shri Vijay Pasi, counsel for the applicant. Shri G.S.Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the respondent /State. A report has been received from the S.H.O.Baikunthpur, District Rewa that the applicant Krishan Deo Singh has expired on 29.12.2011. A copy of his death certificate is also annexed in this regard. Looking to the copy of death certificate, it is apparent that the applicant is no more and therefore, the revision filed by the applicant Krishan Deo Singh turns infructuous. Consequently, the present revision is hereby dismissed being abated. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court as well as appellate Court for information. (N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE pnkj...
Rajendra Agrawal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3338/2013 20.3.2013 Shri Sanjay Patel, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Pushpraj Singh, PL for the State. Shri M. Khan, Advocate for the objector. Admit. Call for the case diary. Heard on I.A.No.6102/2013, an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.55/2013 registered at P.S.Pipariya, District Hoshangabad, for the offence punishable under sections 420, 406, 467, 409/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He is a member of Board of DirectORS.Dy. Registrar Co-operative Societies made an observation that the responsibility of disbursement of loan is on the President and Secretary of the Society. Co-accused Arvind Rai has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.3.2013 passed in M.Cr.C.No.2966/2013. The applicant is a reputed citizen of the locality, in the event of arrest his r...
Sunil Purohit Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
Writ Petition No.4807/2013 20.3.2013 Shri D.D.Bhargawa, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Government Advocate, for the State. Petitioners father Raghuveer Prasad is a life convict. Raghuveer Prasad has been released on parole for 15 days on health grounds. The petitioner has prayed for extension of the period of parole of Raghuveer Prasad. Since Raghuveer Prasad has been released on parole by respondent no.2 for a period of 15 days, he must surrender to custody after the expiry of parole period. And thereafter if the medical officer of the prison is of the opinion that Raghuveer Prasad is suffering from sickness and is likely to die in jail but there is reasonable chance of his recovery, his case be considered in accordance with Rule 361 of the Madhya Pradesh Prisons Rules, 1968. With the above observation, the petition is finally disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. JUDGE ps...
Netram Vs. Collector of District
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
1 W.P. No. 3555 Of 2013 20.3.2013 Shri P.N. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Sheetal Dubey, learned Government Advocate for respondent State, on advance notice. Heard. Petitioner, a Kotwar of village Lurehta, tahsil and district Narsinghpur claiming the ancestral right over the immovable property bearing Khasra Nos. 2, 87 and 154 said to have been allotted to the ancestors of the petitioner by Malguzar prior to coming into force Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals and Alienated Lands) Act, 1950, seeks direction to the respondents to consider his claim for Bhumiswami right as per the decision taken vide circular No. F26/07/ lkr,d dated 3.3.2010 as also a decision taken by Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Tikaram and others v. State of M.P. and another W.P. No. 2064/2000 decided on 3.5.2001. Learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents does No. dispute the issuance of ...
Balveer Singh @ Pappu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.4526/2012 20.3.2013 Shri Anoop Saxena, counsel for the applicant(s).Shri Chandra Kant Mishra, GA, for the respondent/State. Heard. This is second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.FiRs.application was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 7.2.2012 passed in M.Cr.C.No.14763/2011. The applicants are in custody since 20.10.2011 in connection with Crime No.05/2011 registered at P.S.S.T.F./A.T.S., Bhopal for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 471 and 120-B of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. They are not the main accused in the case. It is alleged against the applicants that they entered into a conspiracy of creating a forged documents like birth certificate, LIC policy etc.for getting the driving licence of the main accused Sheikh Mujeeb. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that nothing is collected against the applicants that they are made any forged ...
- ‹ Prev
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- Next ›
- Last »