Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Shyamrao Jharbade Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
WRIT PETITION No.8043/2013 1 25.09.2013 Shri Vikas Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State on advance copy. With the consent of learned counsel for parties heard finally. Stating that the petitioner is also similarly placed person that of Dharam Pal Chaurasiya and otheRs.who have approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.2858/2005 (S).which was disposed of finally vide order dated 23.11.2007 the petitioner is also entitled to be given the benefit of order passed by coordinate bench of this Court at Indore in W.P.No.6773/2006 (S) (Smt. Prerna W/o Shri Promod Koranne versus State of M.P.& otheRs.decided on 26.1.2007, the petitioner has prayed for similar directions. It is seen that the aforesaid writ petition was decided in the following manner: 17. Consequently these petitions are allowed. The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramonnati according to the terms and conditions ...
Rajni Bai Vs. Tulsiram
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
Cr.A.No.473/2013 25.9.2013 Per B.D.Rathi,J Smt. Indu Pandey, Advocate for the appellant. Heard on admission. This appeal has been preferred under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 13.12.2012 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen in Sessions Trial No.167/2011, whereby respondents 1 and 2 namely Tulsiram and Jasman alias Jaswant have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302 and in alternative 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the Code).Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 20.3.2011 at 2:30 am, on the eve of Holi, respondents along with absconding co-accused persons, being armed with Lathis constituted an un-lawful assembly and, in furtherance of its common object, assaulted Jagdish Ahirwar, husband of complainant Rajni (PW5) due to which he became unconscious. After regaining consciousness in the morning Jagdish raised hue and cry, upon which complainan...
Bhageela Koal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
W.P.No.15340/2013 (PIL) (Bhageela Kol versus The State of M.P.& ors.) 25.9.2013 Shri D.K.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Kaurav, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents No.1 and 2. Shri L.N.Soni, learned senior counsel along with Shri Pushpendra Yadav and Shri D.N.Joshi, Advocates for the respondent No.4. In this writ petition, by way of public interest litigation the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: I. To call for entire relevant record. II. To declare the election of the respondent No.4 as President of Madhya Pradesh State Minor Forest Produce Federation is void. III. To direct a detail investigation by any independent agency against the respondent No.4 who enquire the fraud and manipulation committed by him and to direct the responsible authority to take action against officials facilitating the wrong doing of respondent No.4. IV. To direct authorities should be made to ensure the benefit of such extraordinary remarkable scheme ...
Arun Kumar Mishra Vs. M.P. Professional Examination
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
---1--- W.A.No.230/2013 25.9.2013 Shri Manoj Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant. This appeal is directed against an order dated 20.2.2013 in W.P.No.7290/2012 by which writ petition preferred by the appellant, seeking rechek/revaluation of the answer sheet for the Eligibility Test 2011 for Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III, was dismissed. Learned Single Jude while considering the matter found that the appellant could not made out a case for recheck/revaulation of the answer sheet. Learned Single Judge placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Secretary All India Pre Medical/Pre-Dental Examination, Central Board of Secondary Examination and otheRs.versus Khushboo Shrivastava and others Civil Appeal No.7024/2011 dated 17.8.2011 dismissed the writ petition. This order is under challenge. Though learned counsel for the appellant tried to convince this Court that the answer sheets of the appellant were not properly checked, but in absence of any cogent and spec...
M.P.State Co-op Maktg. Federation Vs. M/S Agrawal Traders and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
1 W.P No.2465/2000 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2465/2000 PETITIONER : M. P. STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. Vs. RESPONDENTS : M/S AGRAWAL TRADERS AND ANOTHER. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the petitioner : Shri Abhijeet Bowmik, Advocate. For respondent no.1 : Shri Ishtiyaq Hussain, Advocate. Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice R.S. Jha. ORDER (24/09/2013) The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 31.7.1998 passed by the Board of Revenue in Appeal Case No.2-2/C/251/96 whereby the Board of Revenue has awarded interest on an amount of Rs.41,000/- at the rate of 6% for a period of 9 years to the respondent.2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present petition, are that the parties had entered into an agreement for sale and purchase of 500 quintals of masoor and 430 quintals of chana at the rate of Rs.495/- and Rs.411/- per quintal respectively. The purc...
M/S J.P. Tabacco Products Pvt. Ltd Vs. Thr Commissioner
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
---1--- W.P.No.15068/2013 24.9.2013 Shri A.K.Shrivastava, learned counsel with Shri Sandesh Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents. With the consent of parties the petition is heard finally. The petitioner has sought following relief :- The petitioner therefore prayed that Hon'ble Court may please to - (i) Send for the case record (ii) To direct the respondent no.3 to decide the appeal within the particular time. (iii) To stay the demand of Tax vide order dt. 13.3.2013 till disposal of appeal. (iv) Any other suitable relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted together with the cost of this petition. The case of the petitioner in nutshell is that against the order passed by the Assessing Officer Respondent No.2, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before Respondent No.3, a copy of which is on record as Annexure P-2. Alongwith the appeal, petitioner has filed an application for stay...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Assu @ Ashish
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
M.Cr.C.No.22/2011 24.09.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the applicant- State. Heard on admission. This application for grant of leave to appeal has been preferred under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 4/8/2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Sessions Division, Damoh in Sessions Trial No.344/09, whereby respondents namely Assu alias Ashish and Sooraj Chourasiya have been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC).Prosecution case, in brief is that, on 1/7/09, while dancing in a marriage procession, respondent Sooraj kicked Nitesh Singhai (since deceased) resulting into an altercation between the two. Later, when Dilip Asati, Manav Bajaj, Nitesh Singhai, Banti Jain and Sachin Jain were standing at Bindan Square, respondent Assu Chourasiya came on a Motorycle whereon co-accused Sonu alias Salil and respon...
Vishvendra Nath Gupta Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
WP111712009 (S) 1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR DIVISION BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava, & Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Jain W.P. No.11171/2009 (S) .........Petitioner: Vishvendra Nath Gupta s/o Late Shri Tirath Ram Gupta Chief Inspector of Mines (CIM)/ Director General of Mines Safety (DGMS) (Retd.) R/o 124, Ashok Nagar, Adhartal, Jabalpur (M.P.) Versus .......Respondent : Union of India through the Secretary Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, New Delhi ------------------------------------------- Shri Parag Chaturvedi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, Advocate for the respondent. ------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on this 24th day of September, 2013) Per Justice A.K. Shrivastava: By this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is challenging the validity of WP111712009 (S) 2 the impugned order dated 26.8.2008 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalp...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kantaprasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
M.Cr.C.No.262/2011 24.09.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the applicant- State. Heard on admission. This application for grant of leave to appeal has been preferred under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 4/10/2010 passed by I Additional Judge to the Court of IV Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) at Khandwa in Sessions Trial No.25/10, whereby respondent nos.1 to 5 namely Kantaprasad, Kevalram, Vijay, Roopsingh and Moolibai have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC) and respondent Nos.2 to 5 have also been acquitted of the offences under Sections 306 and 498A of the IPC, whereas respondent no.1 has been convicted under Sections 306 and 498A of the IPC and sentenced accordingly. Marriage of Kamlabai (since deceased) was solemnized with Kantaprasad 10-12 years prior to the date of ...
Manoj Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
M.Cr.C.No.6626/2007 24.9.2013 Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate along with Shri Nishant Datt, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.1. Shri Imtiaz Husain, counsel for the respondent No.2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The applicant has challenged the order dated 19.6.2007 passed by the learned CJM, Bhopal in an unregistered criminal complaint, whereby an order under section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C.was passed for registration of an FIR. The facts of the case, in short, are that, the respondent No.2 has filed a criminal complaint against the applicant for offence punishable under section 406/420 and 506 of IPC. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after perusal of various documents filed by the complainant passed the order dated 19.6.2007, by which the application under section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C.was accepted. The learned senior counsel for the applicant has submitted that the entire matter was of civil nature. The applica...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »