Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
M/S Panch Sheel Construction Co. Vs. Chief Executive Officer
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-10-2013
W.P.No.8775/2013 10/5/2013 Shri P.K.Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vipin Mishra,learned counsel for the respondents on advance notice. Challenging the order dated 26.2.2011 passed by respondent No.1 with-holding certain bills and securities of the petitioner on the ground that certain recovery with regard to another contract is to be made from the petitioner and therefore, the bill with regard to settlement of the present contract shall be made, this writ petition is filed. Question involved in this writ petition i.e.whether default committed and payment due in the matter of execution of one contract can be recovered from another contract has already been considered and decided by a Division Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions decided on 9.10.2012 in W.P.No.13403/2012 - M/s Anand Traders versus State of M.P.& Others and after taking note of clause 5.3.1 of the agreement it has been held that when two different contracts have been awarded and when each wor...
Seva Sahakari Amiti Balgawada Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
W.A.No.233/2013 Seva Sahakari Samity, Balgawada vs The State of M.P.and others 09/05/2013 Shri Amrit Lal Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Jaideep Singh, Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents State. Heard. This appeal is directed against an order dated 22nd February, 2013 passed in W.P.No.2837/2013, by which, the writ petition preferred by the appellant was dismissed on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy. The facts of the case are that the appellant was alloted a fair price shop licence at Bagalwada, District Raisen. The said shop was inspected by the Assistant Supply Officer, Bareli on 08/02/2013 and 12/02/2013. In the inspection, serious irregularities were found in the shop. A report was submitted to the Sub Divisional Officer, Bareli, who by an order Annexure P/1 dated 12/02/2013 directed suspension of the shop and the said shop was attached to a marketing co-operative society, Bareli temporarily. This order dated 12/02/2013 was assailed by the appe...
M/S Telecommunication Consultants India Limited Vs. the State of Madhy ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE : PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR D.B. : HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE KRISHN KUMAR LAHOTI AND HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBHASH KAKADE W.P. No.1/2013 PETITIONER : M/s Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd., through its Authorized representative, Subrata Kumar Swain S/o Shri Ram Chandra Swain, Asst. Manager, Finance & Accounts, Office at : TCIL Bhawan, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi ...
Mansukh Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
Criminal Appeal No.1091/2013 9.5.2013 Shri Y.K.Gupta, Advocate for appellants. Heard on question of admission. Admit. Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, PL takes notice of this admission for State. Call for the record. Heard on I.A.No.10232/2013, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C.for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellants. Appellants have been convicted by the trial Court under Sections 452, 325/34, 324/34, 323/34 (on four counts) of the IPC and sentenced to R.I.for 3 years & fine of Rs.2000/-, R.I.for 3 years & fine of Rs.3000/-, R.I.for 1 year & fine of Rs.2000/- and R.I.for 3 months & fine of Rs.1000/- respectively, with default stipulation. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that during trial appellants were on bail. The trial Court has suspended the jail sentence of the appellants till today. The appeal would take considerable time to dispose of finally, hence jail sentence of appellants be suspended and they be released on bail. Le...
S.K. Prasad Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.A.F.R. JUDGE Criminal Revision No.1545/2010 S.K.Prasad & another VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Anil Khare, Senior Advocate with Ms.Namrata Kesherwani, Advocate for the applicants. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the State/ respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 9th day of May, 2013) The applicant has challenged the order dated 28.6.2010 passed by the learned JMFC, Bhopal (Shri Hemant Savita) in R.T.No.23511/2006, whereby the application filed by the applicants relating to the provisions of section 197 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed.2. The facts of the case, in short, are that, the applicants are Chief Workshop Manager and Deputy Chief Workshop Manager in the factory of Coach Rehabilitation Workshop, Nishatpura, Bhopal. On 26.6.2006, re...
Santosh Kumar Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
Cr. Appeal No.1348/1997 9.5.2013 Shri Vasant Daniel, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, PL for the State. Heard finally. The appellant has been convicted under Section 376/511 of the IPC and sentenced to R.I.for 3 years by the learned Sessions Judge vide judgment and finding dated 1.7.1997 passed in S.T.No.7/96. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the trial Court has committed illegality in appreciating the evidence on record in its proper perspective. There is no evidence on record that the appellant attempted to commit rape on the prosecutrix. Counsel has fairly submitted that only the offence under Section 354 of the IPC has been proved against the appellant. Counsel has further submitted that the incident had taken place in the year 1995, 17-18 years have elapsed by now, the appellant has suffered the jail sentence of about 1 month and 25 days, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice if the appellant is sentenced for the period ...
Yograj Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Ssangyong Engg. and Construction Co. Lt ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR Arbitration Appeal No.9/2013 Yograj Infrastructure Ltd......Appellant Versus Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. Respondent For the appellant: Shri Siddharth Khattar, Advocate. For respondent : Shri Anoop Nair Advocate. Present : HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE AJIT SINGH HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE T. K. KAUSHAL . ORDER (9.5.2013) The following order of the Court was delivered by : Ajit Singh, J.This appeal is directed against the order dated 12.2.2013 passed in M.J.C.No.6/2011 by the First Additional District Judge, Narsinghpur, whereby he has rejected the appellants application for setting aside an interim award.2. The essential facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant is an infrastructure company registered under the Companies Act. The appellant is engaged in the business of construction, development and execution of projects like road, civil works etc. The respondent is also Foreign Company of Korea and it too is engaged in the ...
Chittar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
Criminal Appeal No.697/2008 9.5.2013 Shri Sanjay Patel, Advocate for appellants. Shri Akshay Namdeo, PL for the State. The appellants are produced from Central Jail, Sagar in compliance of warrant of arrest issued by this Court. Heard on I.A.No.10314/2013, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C.for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellants. Appellant No.1 has been convicted by the trial Court under Section 326 of the IPC and sentenced to R.I.for 3 years and fine of Rs.5000/- with default stipulation and Appellant No.2 has been convicted by the trial Court under Section 324 of the IPC and sentenced to R.I.for 1 year and fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the jail sentence of the appellant was suspended by this Court vide order dated 28.3.2008. Thereafter, the appellants could not appear before the registry on the dates which were fixed for their appearance, therefore, warrant of arrest wa...
Vinod Koli Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3429/2013 9.5.2013 Shri Madan Singh, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Akshay Namdeo, PL for the State. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. Previous application M.Cr.C.No.464/2013 was dismissed as withdrawn on 18.2.2013. The applicant is in custody since 13.12.2012 in connection with Crime No.442/2012 registered at P.S.Begamganj, District Raisen for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. After dismissal of the previous application, 3-4 witnesses have been examined before the trial Court. The offence is triable by the Magistrate. 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. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, per...
V.K. Mishra Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-09-2013
W.A.No.981/2012 09.05.2013 Shri R.S.Jaiswal, learned Senior Advocate with Shri K.K.Gautam, counsel for appellant. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, Government Advocate for respondent No.2. None for other respondents. It appears that the notices issued to respondents No.1 and 3 have not returned back. Notice issued to respondent No.5 has returned unserved. In view of the aforesaid, we direct issuance of fresh notice to unserved respondents. Steps within a period of one week by R.A.D.Till next date of hearing, it is directed that the order passed by the writ court in W.P.No.8314/2009 dated 31.07.2012 shall remain in abeyance. C.C.as per rules. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Subhash Kakade) Acting Chief Justice Judge psm...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »