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.
Mitranandan Lokhande Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Criminal Revision No.1366/2011 19.03.2013 Shri Kunal Thakre, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. Heard the learned counsel for the parties finally. The applicants have challenged the judgment dated 1.4.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Chhindwara in Criminal Appeal No.282/2010 whereby the matter was remanded to the trial Court for the trial of offence under Section 326 of IPC and other offences. The brief facts of the case are that in a trial in criminal case No.442/2004 was proceeded before the JMFC Chhindwara and vide judgment dated 17.8.2010 the learned JMFC Chhindwara acquitted the applicants from the charge of offence under Section 326 of IPC, but convicted the applicants for the offence under Sections 452/34, 324/34 and 323/34 of IPC and sentenced them accordingly. In criminal appeal No.282/2010 the learned Sessions Judge permitted the victims Subhash and Raja to enter into a compromise on behalf of themselves as well as...
Chinta Bai Vs. Thr Sub Divisional Officer
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Writ Petition No.8540/2012 19.3.2013 Shri Amal Pushp Shroti, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Government Advocate, for the State/ respondent no.1. Shri Satyam Agrawal, Advocate, for respondent no.2. This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution, is directed against the order dated 6.6.2012 passed by respondent no.1 Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue).Aastha, District Sehore, whereby he has allowed the election petition of respondent no.2. Respondent no.2, after having lost the election for the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Amarpura, District Sehore, against the petitioner by 9 votes, filed an election petition before respondent no.1. One of the main grounds in the petition was that counting of votes was not properly done. Respondent no.1, after examining the materials placed on record, found that there was incoherence between the entries made in the diary of Returning Officer and the account of votes. This position was also not denied by the petitioner. Responden...
Govind Prasad Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Writ Appeal No ::227. / 2013 Govind Prasad Mishra versus State of Madhya Pradesh and others 19.03.2013. Shri Ajay Dwivedi for the appellant. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Government Advocate, for the respondents/State. Challenge in this appeal under section 2 of the M.P.Uchha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, is made to an order-dated 4.2.2013, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.1779/2013. Appellant was initially appointed as a Lab Attendant on 4.11.1969 in the School Education Department and was posted in Higher Secondary School, Nipaniya, District Shahdol. A policy decision was taken by the State Government on 11.10.1995, whereby more than 932 posts of Assistant Teacher (Science) were created and it was decided that all the Lab Attendants working in the pay scale 515-800 be granted upgradation and appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Science).Accordingly, the newly created 932 posts of Assistant Teacher (Science) were directed to be...
Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. V.S. Trivedi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR W.A. No.775/2010 M.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. V. S. TRIVEDI W.A. NO.931/2010 V. S. TRIVEDI VS. M.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Present: Honble Shri S. A. Bobde, CJ & Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Menon, J.In W.A. No.775/2010 Shri P. C. Chandak, learned counsel for the appellant. Respondent in person. In W.A. No.931/2010 Appellant in person. Shri P.C. Chandak, learned counsel for respondent Corporation. _________________________________________________ As per : Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Menon, J.JUDGMENT ( 1932013 ) 2 Both these appeals are filed challenging an order dated 31.8.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.5483/1998 and therefore, both the appeals are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience documents and material available in the record of W.A. No.775/2010 is being referred to in this order.2. Respondent Shri V. S. Trivedi was working in the M.P. State Road Tran...
C.i.T. Vs. Agrawal M.J. Enterprises
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
I.T.R.No.117/1999 Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s Agrawal M.J.Enterprises Jabalpur Jabalpur 19.03.2013 Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate for the Revenue. Shri L.L.Sharma, Advocate for the Assessee. This petition is filed under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for a direction against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the matter for the opinion of this Court. In the application filed by the petitioner herein, following three questions were proposed to be referred for the opinion of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh:- "1. Whether on the facts & in the circumstances, of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the cinema building with all its fixtures including projections, sound system and screen etc.as plant & machinery or allowing depreciation u/s 32 of the I.T.Act, 1961. Though the depreciation is allowed as per rule 5 of I.T.Rules, and Appendix 1 which does not contain description/rate of depreciation for those types of assets?.2. Whether on the facts & in...
Mahesh Vs. Narayan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1882/2013 19/03/2013 Shri S.B.Shrivastava, Advocate for the applicants. Shri C.K.Mishra, GA for the State. None for respondent Narayan despite service of the notice. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicants under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.2073/12, registered at police station Paloha Bada, District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under sections 148, 323, 294, 506 (2),436 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. The case is arose out of the private complaint filed by respondent Narayan. It is further submitted that learned Magistrate took the cognizance on the basis of statement recorded u/s 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C however, all these witnesses have yet to be cross examined on behalf of the applicants. Applicants have no criminal past. They are ready to co-operate in further investiga...
Chairman,m.P.S.E.Board,rampur Jbp. Vs. Naiba Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
F.A. No.68/2005 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava F.A. No.68/2005 APPELLANT Chairman, Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board, Rampur, Jabalpur (M.P.) -Versus- RESPONDENTS:1. Nabia Bai w/o late Jairam Plaintiffs 2. Manmohan (minor) 3. Ku. Radha Bai (minor) 4. Ku. Kala Bai (minor) 5. Ku. Muthia Bai (minor) No.2 to 5 are minot through natural guardian mother Smt. Nabia Bai w/o Late Jairam R/o village Barrukhar, Tahsil & Dist. Raisen. Defendant No.1 6. Narayan Banjara s/o Chain Singh, Agriculturist, R/o village Barrukhar, Tahsil and District Raisen. Defendant No.3 7. State of M.P. through Collector, Raisen, District Raisen (M.P.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.K. Pathak, Advocate for the appellants. Shri Ashok Chakravarti, Advocate for the respondents 1 to 5. None for the respondent No.6. Smt. Pratibha Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.7/State. -----------------...
Kishor Dua Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
W.P.No.4691/13 19/03/13 Shri Rajendra Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.S.Siddiqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Govt. Adv.for the State. Petitioner prayed for several reliefs relating to financial irregularities allegedly being committed by the respondents in respect of MGNREGS in three districts namely Mandla, Dindori and Seoni. Learned Assistant Solicitor General Shri Siddiqui rightly points out that in such matteRs.petitioner should be directed to approach the Lokayukta as held by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kanhaiyalal Vishwakarma versus State of M.P.and otheRs.2011 (1) M.P.H.T.20 . Hence, we accordingly dismiss this petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Lokayukta for agitating his grievance. Petition stands dismissed with the aforesaid. (S.A.Bobde) (Rajendra Menon) Chief Justice Judge Vy/-...
Deepak Vaze Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Criminal Revision No.369/2012 19.03.2013 Shri Pradeep Naveriya, counsel with Ms.Versha Kothari, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Heard the learned counsel for the parties finally. The applicant has challenged the order dated 28.1.2012 passed by the learned J.M.F.C.(Shri C.K.Barpete).Waraseoni in criminal case No.31/2008. The facts of the case relating to the present revision are that a trial for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467 and 468 of IPC was prosecuted against the applicant before the trial Court and on 28.1.2012 the case was fixed for the judgment. The learned J.M.F.C.found some discrepancies in the various policies and therefore, he directed the S.H.O.Waraseoni to further investigate the matter on five various points by the impugned order. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that case was fixed for the...
Lavkush Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1782/2013 19.3.2013 Shri Arvind Chouksey, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 15.12.2012 in connection with Crime No.67/2012 registered at P.S.Atraila, District Rewa for the offence punishable under Sections 307/34 of the IPC and 25/27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Since the incident took place in the night, therefore, it may be a case of mistaken identification. The applicant is in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he be released on bail. Learned counsel for State has opposed the application. I have perused the case diary. There is a direct evidence against the applicant that he assaulted Ranno Devi and Shantan Singh by using country made pistol and they sustained gunshot injuries....
- ‹ Prev
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›
- Last »