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.
Bandu and ors. Vs. Mus.Kamla and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
M.A No.1671 o12. 04.13 Shri Sandeep Koshta, counsel for the appellants. He is heard on the question of admission. ORDER The appellants/ registered owner and driver of the offending tractor bearing not UP-94-1205, has filed this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act,1988 whereby the claim of respondent No.1 to 7 filed with respect of the vehicular death of Vishwanath, the husband of respondent No.1 while the father of respondents No.2 to 5 and son of respondents No.6 and 7, by exonerating the insurance company/ respondent No.8, has been awarded against the appellants by saddling their joint and several liability for the sum of Rs.1,90,000/- along with interest @ 5.5% per annum along with the litigation expenses.2. Having heard the counsel at length on admission, keeping in view his arguments, after perusing the record, I have not found any error in appreciation of the evidence by the tribunal and exonerating the insurer respondent No.8 from the liability of the impugned clai...
Bhola Prasad Patel Vs. Vanaspathi Patel
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
12.04.2013 MCC 337/2013 Shri R. Singh, learned counsel for the application has filed the instant application for extension of time. On 13.12.2011, this Court had passed the following order: This application is filed for restoration of S.A.No.132 of 2008. For the reasons stated in the application for restoration, supported by an affidavit, the prayer made by the applicant is allowed with following conditions:1. Applicant to deposit Rs.100/- within a period of 30 days before the High Court Legal Services Committee and to file receipt in the office.2. On compliance of the aforesaid, office to restore the case and list it before the appropriate Bench. It is stated that the cost as directed has not been deposited within 30 days. Therefore, further two weeks may be granted for compliance of the said order. In the interest of justice, by way of last opportunity, two weeks further time is allowed for compliance of the order. With the aforesaid direction, the MCC is disposed of. No order as to...
Abdul Saeed Vs. Abdul Wahid
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
1 W.P.No.2770/2013 12/4/2013: Shri Pranay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mohd. Ali, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Challenging an interlocutory order Annexure P/8 dated 31.1.2013 passed by Civil Judge, Class I, Bina in Civil Suit No.160A/2010 rejecting an application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 14 of CPC for taking on record certain documents having been rejected, this writ petition has been filed. Petitioner and defendant No.1 are real brothers and dispute in question pertains to certain agricultural land. The suit is pending between the brotheRs.In this suit petitioner wants to bring on record certain documents which are available in the record of another suit. Petitioner obtained certified copy of this documents and filed it in the suit in question. Certified copy of the documents are refused to be taken on record mainly on the ground that petitioner can withdraw the documents from th...
Amit Jaiswal Vs. Smt. Sulekha Jaiswal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
Writ Petition No ::6497. / 2013 Amit Jaiswal versus Smt. Sulekha Jaiswal 12.04.2013. Shri Chandrapal Singh for the petitioner. Shri S.K.Singh, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Petitioner husband has filed this writ petition challenging the order-dated 14.3.2013 Annexure P/1, passed by the District Judge, Katni by which an application filed by the petitioner under Order IX Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been dismissed. Respondent wife initiated proceedings against the petitioner under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restoration of conjugal rights. The application was filed and the case was listed for hearing before the Court on 17.10.2011. On 17.10.2011 the case was taken up for hearing during various hours and when none appeared the case was adjourned to 18.10.2011. Again on 18.10.2011 when the case was called for hearing number of times, from 11.00 AM to 4.40 PM, and when none appeared ex-parte proceedings were held and order passed. Seeking setting aside of the ex-pa...
Ram Bahor Shukla Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
1 Criminal Revision No.762/1998 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL REVISION NO.762 of 1998 Rambahor Vs. The State of M.P. ................................................................................................. Mrs. Manjeet P. S. Chuckal, counsel for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent. .................................................................................................... ORDER (Delivered on the 12th day of April, 2013) The applicant was convicted for offence punishable under Section 420 of I.P.C vide judgment dated 8.9.1994 passed by the JMFC, Rewa in Criminal Case No.401 of 1994 and sentenced with one years rigorous imprisonment and one years simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.3000/-. In Criminal Appeal No.34 of 1994 vide judgment dated 29.6.1998 the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa maintained the conviction but, the sentence was reduced to one ye...
Athletic Sangh Madhaya Pradesh Bhopal M.P. Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
W.P.No.14110/2012 12/04/2013 Shri Manot Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.S.Siddhiqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General for Respondent No.1. Shri Naman Nagrath, learned Sr.Advocate with Shri Awasthi, learned counsel for Respondent No.3. Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, learned counsel for Respondent No.4. I.A.No.3395/2013 has been filed by Respondent No.3 for recalling of an order passed by this Court on 24.1.2013. The dispute in this writ petition pertains to representation of a Athletic Association from the State of Madhya Pradesh in the National bodies. Both the petitioner and Respondent Nos.4 & 5 claim their right. However, taking note of a settlement entered into between the rival contenders i.e.the petitioner and Respondent Nos.4 and 5, the order in question has been passed on 24.1.2013. The contention of Respondent No.3 in this application is that the applicant's federation is guided by it's own bylaws and the settlement arrived at between the parties cannot be enforc...
Nilendra Agrawal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
Writ Petition No ::6611. / 2013 Nilendra Agrawal versus State of MP and another 12.04.2013. Shri Manikant Sharma for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, Dy. Government Advocate, for State. Application of the petitioner making complaint with regard to encroachment on government land is pending consideration before the Collector and SDO, respondent No.2. The said authorities are directed to look into the matter and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. (RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-...
Gilari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.294/2013 Gilari and another VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri B.J.Chourasiya, counsel for the applicants. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 12th day of April, 2013) The applicants were convicted for the offence punishable under sections 325/34 and 323/34 of IPC vide judgment dated 24.8.2012 passed by the learned JMFC, Damoh (Shri Arvind Kumar Barla) in criminal case No.3476/2009 and each sentenced for 1 year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.700/- and 6 months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.300/- respectively. In criminal appeal No.153/2012 vide judgment dated 12.2.2013, the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh partly allowed the appeal. The convict...
Vinod Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2983/2013 12/04/2013 Shri Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for the applicant. Shri C.K.Mishra, GA for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicants have been arrested on 5/02/13 in connection with Crime No.25/13 registered at P.S.Umaria, District Umaria for the offence punishable under section 302/34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that there is no direct allegation against these applicants. As per memorandum, it is alleged that when co-accused Man Singh strangulated the deceased Bablu, these applicants were also with him. It is submitted that aforesaid statement is not admissible in the evidence. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time to be disposed of finally therefore, he prays for bail to these applicants. Learned counsel for the State opposes th...
Dilip Kumar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2384/2013 12/04/2013 Shri P.S.Gaharwar, Advocate for the applicant. Shri C.K.Mishra, GA for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 16/01/13 in connection with Crime No.6/13 registered at P.S.Brijpur, District Panna for the offence punishable under sections 376, 506-II of IPC read with sections 3 (1) (12).3 (2)(5) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that prosecutrix was a consenting party in regard to sexual intercourse. She has not made any complaint against this applicant till she got pregnant. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time to be disposed of finally therefore, he prays for bail to the applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposes the application. Considering the overall facts a...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »