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.
Mahesh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
-(1)- Cr. Appeal No.2417/2005 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.2417/2005 Mahesh Versus State of Madhya Pradesh PRESENT: Honble Shri Justice R.S. JHA, J.----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Shobhna Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, learned panel lawyer for the State/respondent. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (05-04-2013) The appellant has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 18-11-2005 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Betul in S.T. No.174/2004 whereby the appellant Mahesh has been found guilty of an offence punishable under Section 304 (B) of the I.P.C. and has been sentenced to seven years' R.I.2. The prosecution case against the appellant is that the appellant, who is the husband of deceased Namita having married her on 11-5-2003, subjected her to cruelty alongwith his family members in furtheran...
Ramadhar Vs. Ram Dayal Patel
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
W.P.No.4146/2012 05/04/2013 Shri Amilesh Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Challenging the order dated 1.2.2012 passed by the 3rd Civil Judge Class-I, Rewa in Civil Suit No.1-A/2008 rejecting an application filed by the petitioner for amendment in the plaint, this writ petition has been filed. Petitioner is plaintiff and has filed the suit in question for declaration of a registered partition deed dated 15.9.2006 as null and void. In the suit at the stage of evidence, petitioner filed an application for amendment under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC and came out with a case that in the body of the plaint, certain typing error has been committed and, therefore, correction for the same has been sought for. The said application is dismissed and, therefore, this writ petition is filed. The amendment sought for in the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC is to the effect that in the body of the plaint, name of Late Shyam Lal's wife has been mentioned as Manwati, whereas her correc...
Ashish JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
M.Cr.C.No.13914/2012 5.4.2013 Shri Manish Datt, Sr.Counsel with Shri Nishant Datt, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA for the State. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail. Previous application M.Cr.C.No.9585/2012 was dismissed as not pressed on 10.10.2012. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.133/2012 registered at P.S.Damoh Dehat, District Damoh for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 323 and 307 of the IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is a reputed citizen of the locality, in the event of arrest, his reputation will be tarnished, therefore, he be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application. I have perused the case diary. Initially, the name of applicant was not disclosed...
Mahfooj Rehman Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.1813/2005 Mahfooz Rehman Vs. State of MP Present : Honble Mr. Justice R.S. Jha. For the appellant : Shri Rajeev Badkul, Advocate. For the respondent : Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, PL JUDGMENT (05.04.2013) The appellant has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.07.2005 passed by the 12th Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Jabalpur in Session Trial No.184/05 whereby the appellant having been found guilty of an offence punishable under section 489(A) of the I.P.C. has been sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5000/- and additional period of 1 years imprisonment in case of default of deposit of the fine.2. The prosecution case against the appellant is that on 15.12.2004 when the police raided the premises of Anwar alias Baba falling under the jurisdiction of Police Station, Hanumantal, Jabalpur in the afternoon, the accused Anwar alias Baba, Farjan, Mumtaz, Siraz alias Puttar...
Shiv Narayan Vs. Growsef Chemical Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
1 MCRC No 3129 /2013 5.4.2013 Shri Priyank Awasthy, Adv.for the petitioner. Shri Priyank Choubey, Adv.for the respondent. Heard finally. This petition has been preferred for restoration of Criminal Revision No.1732/2012. Since learned counsel for respondent has not objected to the petition for restoration which was dismissed on 2.1.2013 for noncompliance of the Court Order, this petition is allowed. Office is directed to restore Criminal Revision No.1732/2012 of its original number and reflect names of Shri Priyank Awasthy, Adv.for the petitioner and Shri Priyank Choubey, Adv.for the respondent and list before appropriate Bench in next week. With the aforesaid this petition is disposed of. C c as per rules. (M.A.Siddiqui ) JUDGE Ag/...
Sukhram Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
Writ Petition No ::5597. / 2013 Sukhram Patel versus State of MP and others 05.04.2013. Shri Ajay Sen for the petitioner. Smt. Sharda Dubey, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Petitioner is challenging the recovery initiated by the statutory recovery authority appointed and proceeding against the petitioner in accordance to the MP Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and the MP Cooperative Society Rules, 1962. The recovery in question is being undertaken under the MP Cooperative Societies Act and under the said Act Cooperative Courts have been constituted, and the petitioner has remedy of FiRs.Appeal, Second Appeal and Revision before the MP State Cooperative Tribunal, where the grievance of the petitioner can be looked into. As the petitioner has the aforesaid remedy, I see no reason to interfere into the matter. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.to the remedy available under the MP Cooperative Societies Act. Certified copy as per rules. (RAJ...
Smt. Sudha Soni Vs. Smt. Rinku Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH ; JABALPUR M.A No.826/2010 Smt Sudhar Soni and another. Vs. Smt Rinku Singh and two others For the Appellants : Shri Y.M.Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondents : Shri Hari Bahadur Goutam, Advocate. AND M.A No.1702/2010 Smt Rinku Singh and two others Vs. Smt Sudhar Soni and another. For the Appellants : Shri Hari Bahadur Goutam, Advocate. For Respondents : Shri Y.M.Tiwari, Advocate. ORDER (05 /04 /2013 ) U.C. Maheshwari,J.This order shall decide the above-mentioned both the appeals M.A.No.826/10 and MA No.1702/10 as both the appeals are arising between the parties out of the same impugned award.2. The appellants of M.A.No.826/10, being registered owner and driver of the offending vehicle, have filed such appeal being aggrieved by the award dated 17.12.09 passed by MACT Shahdol in Claim Case No.38/09, whereby the claim of the respondents regarding vehicular death of Shri Ravindra Kumar alias Ravindar Singh, the husband of respondent No.1 while father of responde...
Kapil Muni Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
Writ Petition No ::5599. / 2013 Kapil Muni Singh versus State of MP and others 05.04.2013. Shri Ajay Sen for the petitioner. Smt. Sharda Dubey, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Petitioner is challenging the recovery initiated by the statutory recovery authority appointed and proceeding against the petitioner in accordance to the MP Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and the MP Cooperative Society Rules, 1962. The recovery in question is being undertaken under the MP Cooperative Societies Act and under the said Act Cooperative Courts have been constituted, and the petitioner has remedy of FiRs.Appeal, Second Appeal and Revision before the MP State Cooperative Tribunal, where the grievance of the petitioner can be looked into. As the petitioner has the aforesaid remedy, I see no reason to interfere into the matter. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.to the remedy available under the MP Cooperative Societies Act. Certified copy as per rules. (...
Smt. Sushila Devi Agrawal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
1 W.P.No.14403/09 5/04/13 Shri Subodh Pandey and Shri Rawat, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Chourasiya, learned counsel for the respondents. Challenging the show-cause notices issued to the petitioners on 14/10/09 and 16/09/09 demanding payment of tax @ ` 240 per seat instead of ` 160/- being paid by the petitioneRs.this writ petition is filed. Petitioners claimed to be owner of a bus and having permit to ply the bus in question on the route Balaghat to Langhi and Langhi to Balaghat railway station and Risewada to Balaghat. It is the case of the petitioners that the route in question on which the permit has been granted to the petitioners is not a notified route as contemplated in accordance with the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act and until and unless the route in question is not notified in accordance with the statutory scheme imposition of tax @ ` 240 cannot be claimed. Contending that in view of the fact that the routes are not notified under the statutory provisions, pe...
Bhimsen Chaturvedi Vs. Jagat Bahadur Chaturvedi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
1 W.P.No.12035/2011 5/4/2013: Shri Grishm Jain, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rakesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the respondent. Challenging the interlocutory order Annexure P/1 dated 30.6.2011 passed by the IInd Civil Judge Class II, Sidhi in Civil Suit No.47-A/2011, petitioners have filed this writ petition. Petitioners are defendants and are facing the suit filed by respondent in the matter of possession of the land in question measuring 5880 Sq.ft. In the said suit both the parties have filed the site maps and as there is discrepancy in the maps a application for appointment of commission was filed before the Court below. The learned Court below found that for the purpose of examining possession, appointment of Commission is not necessary and therefore, application is rejected. Placing reliance on a judgment rendered by this Court in Tara Singh versus Shri Parshvanath Digember Jain Mandir Pisanhari Madhiya Trust reported in 2012 (2) MPWN Page 50 and a judgment of Divisi...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »