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.
Ganesh Prasad Tiwari Vs. Thr Commissioner
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
Con.C.No.419/07 9/04/13 Shri V.K.Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Inter alia contending that certain directions issued by this Court on 28/08/06 in W.P.No.11880/06 (s) has not been complied with, this application was filed for initiating action for contempt. The contempt application was filed on 23/02/07. As none appeared, it was dismissed for want of prosecution and, thereafter, it was restored vide order passed on 17/10/07 in M.C.C. No.1318/07. Notices have been issued and service on the respondents has not been effected. The respondents arrayed was the officer who was holding the charge in the year 2007 and now, he is no more in service. He is retired and new incumbent is holding the charge and no steps are taken for impleading the new respondent. The only direction issued in the writ petition was for payment of salary for the period October 1998 to December 1999 and take a decision. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances, it is not appropriate not to initiate ...
M/S Gsb Construction Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Jabalpur Devlopment Authy.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No.4430/2008 M/s. GSB Construction Pvt. Ltd..Petitioner Versus Jabalpur Development Authority and another.Respondents For the petitioner: Shri A. S. Jha, Senior Advocate, with Shri Dinesh Upadhyay, Advocate. For respondent : Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal with Shri Amit Seth, Advocates. no.1 For respondent : Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General. No.2 ****** Present: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE AJIT SINGH ****** ORDER (9.4.2013) The following order of the Court was delivered by : Ajit Singh, J.As the name suggests, the petitioner is involved in construction business whereas respondent no.1 is the Jabalpur Development Authority (in short, the Authority.) established under section 38 of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (in short, the Adhiniyam.). By virtue of section 39 the Authority is a body corporate and has perpetual succession and a common seal, with power to acquire and hold property both moveable and immovable...
Narmada Prasad Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
1 Criminal Revision No.775/1999 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.775 of 1999 Narmada Prasad VERSUS State of Madhya Pradesh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Sharad Verma, counsel for the applicant. Shri G. S. Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. ORDER (Passed on the 9th day of April, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 7(1) read with 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the P.F. Act.) vide judgment dated 24.4.1996 passed by the JMFC, Harda (Shri B.R. Patil) in Criminal Case No.165 of 1984 and sentenced for six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2000/-. In Criminal Appeal No.56/1996 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Harda vide judgment dated 29.4.1999 dismissed the appeal. Being 2 Criminal Revision No.775/1999 aggrieved with th...
Prem Singh Lodhi Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.580/13 09.04.13. Shri Pradeep Singh, Adv.for the petitioner. Shri Satya Pal Singh Chadar, PL for the respondent- State. Heard on the point of admission. The petition seems to be arguable, hence admitted for final hearing. Also heard on IA No.1030/13, an application for grant of stay of further proceedings. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the offence of abetment to commit suicide by Harlal. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was demanding money and thereby he instigated the deceased to commit suicide. Counsel submits that merely by demanding the money, it cannot be said that petitioner has instigated the deceased to commit suicide. Looking to the circumstances of the case, it is directed that further proceedings of ST No.16/13 pending before Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur shall remain stayed till next date of hearing. List for final hearing immediately after ensuing summer vacation. C.c.as per rules. ...
Shyamraj Tripathi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
W.P.No.9357/2011 09.04.2013 Shri H.S.Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy. Government Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri Ved Prakash Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No.3 and 4. Shri Gaurav Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No.5. Shri K.K.Singh, Advocate for respondent No.6. Looking to the controveRs.involved in this case, the matter is heard finally with the consent of the parties. The facts of the case are that the petitioner had applied for admission for B.Ed. CouRs.through the respondent No.1. By seat allocation letter Annexure P-1 dated 22.02.2010, the petitioner was allocated to the College of respondent No.5 namely Shri Ram Krishna College of Education, Satna. Petitioner was further directed to deposit fees to the same College, and as per the receipt Annexure P-2, the petitioner had deposited fees of Rs.20,000/- on 25.02.2010 for admission in the respondent No.5 College. It appears that in the list sent to the College, in respect of students, who were a...
Sone Lal Sahu and anr. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.985/1999 Parmanand Sahu VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri R.K.Sahu, counsel for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 9th day of April, 2013) The applicant No.2 was convicted for the offence punishable under section 7 (1) read with section 16 (1) (a) (i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter it will be referred to as the 'PF Act') vide judgment dated 25.4.1992 passed by the Special Municipal Magistrate, Jabalpur in criminal case No.2694/1990 and sentenced for 6 months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/-. In criminal appeal No.36/1992, the learned Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur vide judgment dated 24.6.1999 dismissed the appeal ...
Smt. Sushila Markam Vs. Inder Singh Markam
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
Cr.R.No.441/2013 5.4.2013 Shri Abhay Gupta, counsel for the applicant. None for the respondent. Heard on admission. The applicant has preferred the present revision against the order dated 30.1.2013 passed by the Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in MJ.No.11/2013 whereby the maintenance application of the applicant was dismissed. The facts of the case in short are that, the applicant has moved an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C that her marriage took place with the respondent in the year 1986 and thereafter, the respondent was in habit to assault the applicant after consuming liquor. He was spending his salary in gambling. On 11.5.2011, the applicant was sent away along with her children and she took shelter in the house of her sister Shakuntala. Under such circumstances, she prayed for her maintenance. The respondent in his reply denied the allegations. He has submitted that the respondent and the applicant have three children. The elder son is studying...
Smt.Mahasweta Vs. Anish Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
Cr.R.No.1332/2007 8.4.2013 None for the applicant. Shri Devesh Bhojne, counsel for the respondent. None appeared for the applicant on 7.5.2008, 23.7.2008 and thereafter. None appears for the applicant even today. It appears that the learned counsel for the applicant does not want to prosecute the present revision. Consequently the present revision application filed by the applicant Mahasweta against the impugned order dated 20.2.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in Criminal Revision No.114/2006 is hereby dismissed in want of prosecution. Interim stay if granted is hereby vacated. Copy of the order be sent to the trial Court so that trial Court may proceed further with the complaint. (N.K.Gupta) Judge bina...
Dr. Harkirat Bains Vs. Barkatullah University
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No.1006/2013 Dr. Harkirat Bains.Petitioner Versus Barkatullah Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal, and two othersRespondents For the petitioner : Shri Swapnil Ganguly, Advocate. For the respondents: Shri Kamlesh Dwivedi, Advocate. ****** Present: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE AJIT SINGH ****** ORDER (9.4.2013) The following order of the Court was delivered by : Ajit Singh, J. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision of respondent no.1 Barkatullah Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal, rejecting his thesis for the degree of Doctorate of Science.2. The petitioner, as a student of respondent no.1, submitted his thesis for the degree of Doctorate of Science. His subject title was The capacity building and skill up-gradation of Anganwadi workers.Ordinance 15 of respondent no.1 provides the procedure for grant of decree of Doctorate of Science. Its relevant extract of Clause 13 reads as under:13. (a) On receipt of the thesis the Registrar shall cal...
Vinod Mantri Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2013
M.Cr.C.No.4461/2009 09.04.2013 Shri Satyam Agrawal, counsel for the petitioner/complainant. Shri G.S.Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1/State. None for the respondent No.2/accused. The petitioner has filed the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.against the order dated 22.4.2009 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore in criminal revision no.15/09 upholding the order dated 18.12.2008 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate FiRs.Class (Ku. Vineeta Bhatnagar).Sehore in criminal case no.790/07 convicting the respondent No.2/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentencing till arising of the Court and pay compensation an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- under Section 357 (3) of Cr.P.C.On perusal of the record, it becomes clear that a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed by the petitioner/complainant against the accused regarding non-payment of the cheque amounting to Rs.2,...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »