Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Smt. Janaki Devi Maravi Vs. Smt. Siya Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
1 WRIT PETITION NO.17188/2011 13/08/2013 Smt.J.Choudhari, learned senior counsel with Ms.Jaiyalaxmi Aiyyer, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate for respondents No.8 and 9. None for respondents No.1 to 7. Heard. Election for Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Chapra, Developement Block Bahoriband, District, Katni reserved for schedule Tribe, was held on 18.01.2010 wherein respondent No.1 was declared elected. The election was called in question by the petitioner, who lost, vide Election Petition under Section 122 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 read with Rules framed thereunder, viz, the Madhya Pradesh Panchayats (Election Petitions, Corrupt Practices & Disqualification for Membership) Rules, 1995, 2 WRIT PETITION NO.17188/2011 (referred as Rules, 1995) mainly on the ground that the respondent No.1 does not belong to schedule tribe and the certificate in support thereof filed by her with the nomination form was forged...
Arvind Singh Rajput Vs. Pradeep Chourasiya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
Criminal Revision No.1472/2013 13/08/2013 Shri Surendra Patel, counsel for the applicant. Heard. Applicant has filed this revision against the order dated 25.4.2013 passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in Criminal Revision No.25/2013 affirming the order dated 2.1.2013 passed by Judicial Magistrate FiRs.Class, Sagar in Criminal Case No.3916/2010 rejecting the application filed by the applicant for getting the impugned cheque examined by the handwriting expert. It has been observed by the revisional court that since applicant admitted his signature on the cheque, even if the amount of cheque was filled by somebody else, it would not make the cheque invalid. Hence, to get the impugned cheque examined by the handwriting expert would be a futile exercise delaying the proceedings of the trial court. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and after perusal of the impugned order, I find that no error or illegality has been committed by the courts be...
Ram Chandra Barlakar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
W.P.No.12996/2013 (R.C.Barlakar versus State of MP and otheRs.13.08.2013 Heard Shri Gyanendra Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondents/authorities to execute the order passed by the Labour Court, Rewa. It is stated in the petition that subsequent to the award of the labour court the petitioner has preferred the application under section 108 of the Industrial Relation Act before the labour court and the said labour court by order dated 26.03.2013 has directed for payment of arrears of salary within 30 days failing which the Revenue Recovery Certificate shall be issued. The R.R.C.has been issued thereafter but the payment has not been made by the respondents/authorities and therefore, this court may issue appropriate orders in the matter. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is observed that the petitioner is seeking execution of the order...
Shravan Kumar Dwivedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
W.P.No.13244/2013 Shravan Kumar Dwivedi vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 13.08.2013 Heard Shri Sanjay Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner, who holds a D.Ed. Degree and has obtained 48.22% marks in the Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination, submits that the respondent authorities are not taking further steps towards appointment of the petitioner as Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III inspite of the fact that he has been selected and his name appears in the fiRs.list but thereafter his name has been placed in the list of candidates which requires scrutiny and rectification. It is submitted that the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent authorities which has not been decided till date. In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner approaches the respondent authorities within fifteen days from today alongwith a ...
Sanjay Soni Vs. Sardar Indrajeet Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
Civil Revision No.378 o13. 08.2013 Shri Ajay Ojha, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri N.P.Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent. In compliance of the earlier order of the Coordinate Bench, this matter is placed before me for final disposal at motion stage. Pursuant to it, the same is taken up for hearing. Applicants' counsel after taking me through the averments of the revision memo by referring the definition of Specified Landlord enumerated under Section 23 (J.(iv) of the M.P.Accommodation Control Act 1961, firstly argued that the impugned order was passed by the Rent Controlling Authority without extending the opportunity to make oral arguments to the applicants herein, so also without considering the aforesaid definition of Specified Landlord. Thus, the same is not sustainable. In continuation, on referring some part of impugned order, on which I have perused the record of the Rent Controlling Authority bearing No.19-A-90 (7)/2006, in which I have found the impugned order...
The Distt. Co-operative Central Bank Ltd Vs. Ramswaroop Patel
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
M.C.C.No.1795/2011 13.8.2013 Shri Kamlesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant. This application is filed for restoration of Writ Appeal No.74/2011 which was dismissed in default on 29-11-2011. This application is filed on the ground that the counsel of the applicant had met with an accident and he was unable to attend the court because of which he could not appear before this Court on 29-11-2011 when the appeal was heard and dismissed in default. The application is duly supported by an affidavit of Shri R.K.Raghu, General Manager of the applicant. Prayer made in the application is not opposed, hence this application is allowed. Office is directed to restore the Writ Appeal No.74/2011 to its original number and place it before the appropriate Bench for consideration immediately after one week. The MCC is accordingly finally disposed of. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Subhash Kakade) Acting Chief Justice Judge ac....
Divisional Eng.,mpeb and ors Vs. Shankar Pratap Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
1 FA No.222 o13. 8.2013 None for the appellants. Shri J.K.Verma, counsel for the respondent. Initially this case was listed yesterday in the list of motion hearing cases for consideration of IA No.5252/13 but on taking up the matter no one was present, on which, the same was kept as pass-over matter. Pursuant to it, it is listed today in the list of not reached cases. On taking-up the matter the same position that no one is present on behalf of the appellants to assist the court to adjudicate the aforesaid IA. In such premises, I deem fit to decide such IA after hearing the counsel of the respondent. The same is taken for consideration. Respondent's counsel after taking me through the averments of the application along with the impugned judgment and the record of the trial court argued that the impugned suit of the respondent No.1 filed for compensation and damages regarding loss of crops of Sugarcane due to fault of electricity board was decreed for the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with...
Smt. Bhagwati @ Roma Chugh Vs. M.P. Housing Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADEESH JABALPUR (Second Appeal No. 1160/2008) Smt. Bhagwati Vs. M.P. Housing Board and another PRESENT : HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY YADAV Counsel for Petitioner Shri Ravish Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Shri K.S. Jha, Advocate. Counsel for respondents Shri V.S. Shroti, Senior Advocate with Shri Vikram Johri, Advocate. Counsel for intervener Shri Ashok Banke, Advocate. J U D G M E N T (13/8/2013) PER SANJAY YADAV, J This second appeal at the instance of plaintiff was admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether the courts below committed an error of law in not addressing itself to the controversy with regard to unreasonable and arbitrary hike/revision of rates of the disputed space and misdirected it in deciding the issue as to whether the defendants had authority in law to revise the rates of the disputed space?. (ii) Whether the finding recorded by the lower appellate...
Bhagwan Das Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
1 C.R No.213 o13. 8.2013 Shri Dilip Singh Parihar, counsel for the applicants. Shri Santosh Yadav, PL for respondent No.1. Shri Abhijeet Bhowmik, counsel for the respondent No.2. The applicants have preferred this revision under section 115 of the CPC being aggrieved by the order dated 12.3.13 passed by the Collector, Singrouli in Case No.382/A-74/2011-12 whereby the reference application filed on behalf of the applicants under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, instead to send to the reference court for adjudication, the same was dismissed by considering the merits of the same. Initially, the case was argued at length for admission and allowing this revision but in the available circumstances that even after allowing this civil revision the impugned application of the applicants filed under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act could not be adjudicated finally, on making certain query from the applicants counsel, on which, after perusing the proviso of section 115 and the impugn...
Jitendra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2013
1 Criminal Appeal No.1208 of 2009 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBHASH KAKADE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1208 of 2009 APPELLANT: Jitendra s/o Mahasingh Verma, aged about 37 years, R/o Pataleshwar, Chhindwara, P.S. Kundipura, District Chhindwara (MP) Versus RESPONDENT: State of Madhya Pradesh, through Police Station Chourai, District Chhindwara (M.P.). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.D. Mishra, Advocate for the appellant. Smt. Nirmala Nayak, Govt. Advocate for the respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgment reserved on :14. 05.2013 Judgment delivered on :13. 08.2013 (JUDGMENT) The appellant Jitendra being aggrieved by the judgment dated 10/06/2009 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Chhindwara in Session Trial No.134/2007 has filed this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Proc...
- ‹ Prev
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- Next ›
- Last »