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.
Shiv Charan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3445/2013 19.3.2013 Shri Siddharth Datt, Advocate for the applicants. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. Admit. Call for the case diary. Heard on I.A.No.6323/2013, which is an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail. The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.25/2013 registered at P.S.Silwani, District Raisen for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 506/34 of the IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. They are father-in-law and mother-in-law of complainant Janki Bai. The complainant is living in her parental house for the last more than one year, thereafter, she filed concocted report against her husband and the applicants. It is a matrimonial case, in the event of arrest, chances of compromise between the parties, if any, will be diminished, therefore, applicants be released on ad-interim anticipatory bail. Learned counsel fo...
The Chairman,mpeb. and ors Vs. Achhelal Lodhi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
F.A. No.107/04 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava F.A. No.107/2004 APPELLANTS 1 The Chairman, Madhya Pradesh Defendants Electricity Board Rampur, Jabalpur (M.P.) 2. The Divisional Engineer, M.P. Electricity Board (O/M), Satna Division, Prem Nagar, Satna M.P.3. Officer in Charge, M.P. Electricity Board Majhgaon, Satna. -Versus- RESPONDENT Acchelal Lodhi s/o Ramgopal Lodh Plaintiff village Ranipur, Tah : Raghuraj Nagar, District Satna. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Arup K. Das, Advocate for the appellants. None for the respondent. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT {19032013} Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 10.10.2003 passed by learned Third Additional District Judge, Satna in Civil Suit No.2-B/2003 whereby the suit of plaintiff for compensation to the tune of Rs.12,000/- and interest @9% per ...
Suraj Prasad Nigam Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
W.A.NO.1119/2012 19-03-2013 Shri O.P.Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellants. Challenge in this writ appeal under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaya Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam,2005 is made to an order dated 23-08-2012, passed by the learned Single Judge of this court in W.P.No.19347/2011 Appellants were appointed in the year 1985 as daily wages employees in the department concerned. It was the grievance of the appellants that by the impugned order passed on 18-10-2011, the appellants as daily wages employees have been transferred from Shahdol to District Panna in a illegal manner. Placing reliance on a full Bench Judgment of this court in W.P.No.1967/2003 (Ashok Tiwari versus Madhya Pradesh Text Book Corporation and otheRs.challenge was made by the appellants to the impugned order of transfer. The challenge having been rejected by the learned Single Judge, this writ appeal is filed. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants...
Dayashankar Sharma Vs. Lalita Devi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Cr.R.No.91/2013 19.3.2013 Shri Pranay Verma, counsel for the applicant. Shri Aseem Dixit, counsel for the respondents. As prayed by learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally. The applicant has preferred the present revision against the order 5.11.2012 passed by the learned VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa, Link Court at Mauganj in Criminal Revision No.274/2011 whereby the final order dated 23.2.2012 passed by the learned ACJM, Mauganj in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No.7/2011 was set aside. Facts of the case in short are that, the respondents have moved an application for maintenance which was pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mauganj. The trial Court has passed an interim order of maintenance which was challenged by the respondents in Criminal Revision No.274/2011. The applicant filed so many Criminal Revisions against the various orders passed by the ACJM, Mauganj. During the pendency of the aforesaid revisions the case was concluded and the ...
M/S Ashok Leyland Finance Ltd. Vs. Saiudeen and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Criminal Revision No.1616/1999 19.03.2013 None for the applicant. None for the respondent No.1. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.2/State. It appears that no advocate is appearing on behalf of the applicant to argue the matter since last ten yeaRs.It appears that the learned counsel for the applicant does not want to prosecute the present revision. Consequently, the revision filed by the applicant namely M/s Ashok Leyland Finance LTD.is hereby dismissed in want of the prosecution. The stay order dated 3.11.1999 is hereby vacated. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court as well as revisionary Court for information and compliance. (N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE pnkj...
Smt. Sushma Raje Vs. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Writ Petition No.12567/2011 19.3.2013 Shri S.D.Mishra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Government Advocate, for the State/ respondent no.1. Shri Hemant Namdeo, Advocate, for respondent no.7. Heard on admission. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 4.7.2012 passed by respondent no.1 Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue).Bijawar, District Chhattarpur, whereby he has dismissed the petitioners election petition. The petitioner, after having lost the election for the office of Sarpanch against respondent no.2 by 14 votes, filed an election petition before respondent no.1. One of the main grounds in the petition was that for want of sufficient light counting of votes was not properly done. Respondent no.1 earlier vide order dated 23.11.2010 allowed the election petition against which respondent no.2 filed Writ Petition No.17276/2010 before this High Court. And the writ petition was allowed vide order dated 28.2.2011. The case was ...
Pawan Lath Vs. Vinod
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Mcr.C.No.892 o19. 03.13 Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Pushpendra Dubey, counsel for the applicant. Shri M.K.Tripathi, counsel for the respondent No.1. Shri Pramod Choubey, counsel for respondent No.2. Although this matter is listed today for admission and consideration of the stay application IA No.1518/13 but in the available scenario of the matter instead to hear only on such question, with the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. ORDER 2. The applicant has filed this petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the order dated 10.1.13 passed by the Addl. Judge to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Burhanpur in Cr.R.No.151/12 affirming the interim order dated 9.11.12 passed by the SDM, Burhanpur in Criminal Case No.4/12, whereby in a complaint filed by respondent No.1 under section 133 of the Cr.P.C, some interim order restraining the applicant to carry-out his industrial activity, has been stayed without complying the directi...
Rajnarayan Dwivedi Vs. Girish
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
W.P. No. 18138 Of 2012 19.3.2013 Shri Siddharth Gulati, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard. Order dated 10.10.2012 passed by District Judge, Chhatarpur in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 11/2011 is being assailed vide this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; whereby, temporary injunction granted in favour of respondents/plaintiffs by the trial court has been affirmed. Suit for declaration and permanent injunction at the instance of respondents/plaintiffs is that they are doing business under the brand name Rashtriya Khajuraho Griha Udyog. and Calash Chhap Tobacco Lalluwali. That, resembling their brand name and wrapper the petitioner/defendant has also started the similar business under the name of Rashtrapriya Khajuraho Tambakhu Griha Udyog.. The respondents/plaintiffs also sought temporary injunction during pendency of suit. Trial ...
M.P.E.B. Vs. Bhagauna
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
F.A. No.31/1999 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava F.A. No.31/1999 APPELLANTS 1 Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board through the Superintending Engineer, Rampur, Jabalpur (M.P.) 2. M.P. Electricity Board through the Executive Engineer (O&M), M.P. Electricity Board, Katni, Tah. Murwara, Distt. Katni (M.P.) 3. M.P. Electricity Board through the Sub- Engineer, M.P.E.B., Rithi, Tah. Murwara, Distt. Katni (M.P.) -Versus- RESPONDENTS:1. Bhagauna s/o Doji Lodhi, Agriculturist 2. Chiranjiyabai w/o Bhagauna Lodhi, Occupation- Housewife, Both R/o village Raipura, Police Station Raipura, Tahsil Shahnagar, Panna (M.P.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri R.S. Jaiswal, Senior Advocate with Shri K.K. Gautam, Advocate for the appellants. Shri Ashok Lalwani, Advocate for the respondents. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT {19032013} Fe...
Smt. Mamta Rani Mishra Vs. Shri Sanjay Kumar Shukla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
CONC No.1248.12 CONC No.1248 of 2012 (Smt. Mamta Rani Mishra versus Shri Sanjay Kumar Shukla and three otheRs.19-03-2013 Shri Atul Choudhari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.3. Heard. By order dated 21-02-2012, Writ Petition No.6848/2011 filed by the petitioner, Principal Nagar Nigam Pandit Loknath Shastri Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya Govindganj, Jabalpur, seeking enhanced age of retirement, was allowed with direction to respondents to ensure that the petitioner is permitted to work till age of 65 yeaRs.Though reinstated and allowed to work, the petitioner was, however, not paid the wages which led the petitioner to file this Contempt Petition. That during pendency of this petition cheque bearing No.731921 dated 18-03-2013 amounting to Rs.3,57,262/- has been issued in favour of the petitioner duly acknowledged by her counsel. In view whereof no cause not survives as would warrant any further action. In the result proceedings are d...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »