Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
Sanjay Maheshwari Vs. Shri Ajatshatru Shrivastava
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
Sanjay Maheshwari versus Shri Ajatshatru Shrivastava Con.C.No.392/12 25/04/13 Shri Ajay Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Naman Nagrath, learned counsel for the respondent. Petitioner wants compliance of an order passed in W.P.No.182/11 (s) on 7/01/11. Learned counsel for the respondent points out that after the order was passed in the writ petition, a Review petition R.P.No.633/12 was filed which was disposed of on 3/09/12 and learned counsel for the respondents produces a certified copy of the order dated 3/09/12 passed in R.P.No.633/12 to say that the original order passed in the writ petition is reviewed and, therefore, not no action for contempt can be taken. Taking note of the aforesaid, for the present, I am not inclined to initiate any action for contempt, instead, liberty is granted to the petitioner to seek enforcement of the modified order dated 3/09/12 passed in R.P.No.633/12. With the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner, this application stands dispose...
Ghanshyam Singh Vs. Chethu and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
-( 1 )- S.A.No.794/1997 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR Second Appeal No.794 / 1997 Ghanshyam Singh Versus Chethu & three others ______________________________________________ Shri Harjas Singh Chhabra, learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff. None for respondents. ______________________________________________ PRESENT : Honble Shri R.S. Jha, J.: JUDGMENT (25-04-2013) The appellant/plaintiff has filed this appeal assailing the legal validity of the judgment and decree dated 9-8-1997 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Chhindwara, in C.A. No.18-A/1996, whereby the judgment and decree dated 16-2-1996 passed by the Civil Judge Class-II, Amarwara, District Chhindwara in C.S.No.5-A of 1990 has been reversed.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondents No.1, 2 and 3 on the ground that the appellant/plaintiff was owner and in possession of Khasra No.98/2, area 0.917 ...
Durga Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
1 Cr.A. No.828 of 2000 Cr.A. No.956 of 2000 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR DIVISION BENCH: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH SAKSENA HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBHASH KAKADE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.828 of 2000 APPELLANT: Kallu @ Devendra S/o Ramraj, Aged- about 19 years, Caste Kori, R/o- H.No.27, Near the house of Hukumchand Prajapati, Chandwar, Thana Station Bajaria, Bhopal Versus RESPONDENT: The State of Madhya Pradesh and CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.956 of 2000 APPELLANT: Durga Singh S/o Devi Singh, Aged- about 20 years, Caste Chouhan, R/o- H.No.7, Near Cloth Mill Gate, Near the house of Hukumchand Prajapati, Thana Station Bajaria, Bhopal Versus RESPONDENT: The State of Madhya Pradesh Through Police Station Govindpura, Bhopal --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Appellants : Shri Ghanshyam Pandey, Learned Counsel For the Respondent/State: Shri Amit Pandey, Learned Penal Lawyer -----------------------------------------------------------...
C.i.T. Vs. Mandideep Engg. and Packing Industries
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
1 ITA No.86/2000 Commissioner of Income Tax Mandideep Engineering & Bhopal Packing Industries (P) LTD.25.4.2013 Shri Sanjay Lal, Counsel for appellant. Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Counsel for respondent. This appeal is directed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against an order dated 26.11.1999 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore by which prayer of the appellant for reference of the matter under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act was declined. The appellant herein had made a prayer to the Tribunal for referring following questions for the opinion of this Court:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in law in setting aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and deleting the disallowances made by the AO on account of claims of deduction u/s 80HH and 80-I of the IT Act?. (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in law in holding that the adjustments made t...
Ashraf Ali Vs. Shri Gulshan Bamra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
Ashraf Ali versus Shri Gulshan BaMr.& Another Conc. No.507 25. 4.2013: Shri Arvind Chouksey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for respondents. Interalia contending that an order dated 30.1.2013 passed in W.P.No.1334/2012 has not been complied with, this contempt application is filed. Petitioner is owner of certain land bearing KhaSr.No.60, 62/2, 63/2 situated in village Badanpur and it was a case of petitioner that he had submitted an application for demarcation and when nothing was done for a period of more than 2 years he approached this Court by filing a writ petition. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to conduct demarcation and submit a report to the petitioner within 30 days, when action was not taken within 30 days, this contempt application is filed. not respondents have filed the reply and from the affidavit filed by respondents it is seen that the area in question is a remote area situate...
Sunil Kumar JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
1 W.P.No.21292/2012 25/4/2013: Shri Parag Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the fact that representation of the petitioner with regard to payment in question for the supply made is pending before the Collector, Jabalpur as is evident from the representation dated 2.12.2012 and keeping in view the order dated 2.1.2012 passed in W.P.No.21293/2012 under similar circumstances in W.P.No.21293/2012, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merits, the Collector concerned respondent No.3 is directed to decide the claim of the petitioner in accordance to law within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the Collector found that petitioner is entitled to the amount as claimed in the representation, the same shall be paid. Else it shall be incumbent upon the Collector to record reasons for the same. With the aforesaid, this petition stands disposed of. c.c.as per rules. ( Rajendra MeNo.) Judge Mrs.mishra...
M/S Wear Well Tyre and Tubes Private Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL REVISION NO.292/2011 M/s. Wear Well Tyre and Tubes Private Limited Pankha, Betul, District Betul and 3 others. Vs. The Union of India ................................................................................................. Shri Atulanand Awasthy, counsel for the applicants. Shri S. K. Menon, counsel for the respondent. .................................................................................................... ORDER (Delivered on the 25th day of April, 2013) The applicants have preferred the present revision against the order dated 29.12.2010 passed by the Ist Additional Judge to the Court of Vth Additional Session Judge, Chhindwara in Criminal Revision No.36/2009 whereby the impugned order dated 21.1.2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhindwara in Criminal Case No.3509/1997 was set aside and the application filed under Sections 65, 74, 78 and 79 of the...
Mohammad Salim Vs. M.P. Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
S.A.No.167/98 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR Second Appeal No.167/1998 Mohammad Salim Versus M.P. Electricity Board and Ors. ___________________________________________________ Shri Dinesh Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant. None for the respondents. ___________________________________________________ PRESENT : Honble Shri R.S. Jha, J.: JUDGMENT (25-04-2013) Appellant has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 9.12.1997 passed by the Additional District Judge Sagar, Camp Khurai, in Civil Appeal No.54- A/1997 whereby the judgment and decree dated 27.4.1995 passed in Civil Suit No.78-A/1992 by the Civil Judge Class II, Bina, District Sagar, has been affirmed and confirmed.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that appellant had filed a suit claiming compensation from the respondent for installation of a High Tension Pole for supply of electricity line in his field. S.A.No.167/98 3. Both the Courts below have dismiss...
Allauddeen Siddiqui Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
Writ Petition No ::7127. / 2013 Allauddeen Siddiqui versus State of MP and others 25.04.2013. Shri D.P.Patel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Government Advocate, for the State on advance notice. Challenging an interlocutory order passed by the Additional Collector on 5.4.2013 in a pending appeal under section 91 of the MP Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Petitioner claims to be resident of the village in question and it is stated that he has filed a complaint against respondent No.5 Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, proceedings were held and the Sub Divisional Officer directed for her removal and recovery of certain amount. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, respondent No.5 preferred an appeal under section 91 before the Additional Collector. The appeal on merits is pending consideration and pending final disposal of the appeal as an interim measure the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer ha...
Vidya Kharadi Vs. the State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2013
W.P.(s)No.5205/2005 25/04/2013 None for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned counsel for Respondent No.1. Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 Challenging her retirement ordered vide Annexure-P28 dated 13.9.2004 under Rule 42(1)(B) of the M.P.Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1976 r/w Rule (1-A) of the M.P.Districts and Sessions Judges (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1964, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Petitioner was appointed as a Civil Judge in the year 1987, she was selected for appointment in a category reserved for Schedule Tribe Candidates and after undergoing her initial training for a period of six months, she was appointed as a Civil Judge, thereafter, she was promoted as Judicial Magistrate 1st Class and finally after posting at various places, she was promoted in the Higher Judicial Service and was officiating as a District Judge. While working so, the impugned action is taken and, therefore, this writ petition. Pointing out that she ...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »