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.
Manilal and ors Vs. Dhanji Bhai and anr
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.First Appeal No.2/2004 Manilal and others VERSUS Dhanji Bhai (Dead through LRs) and others --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri R.P.Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Shri Anuj Agrawal, Advocate for the appellants. Shri P.R.Bhave, Senior Advocate with Shri B.P.Yadav, Advocate for the respondents. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 23rd day of September, 2013) The appellants/defendants No.2 to 4 have preferred the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated 4.12.2003 passed by the learned First Additional District Judge, Betul in civil suit No.42-A/2002, whereby a decree of declaration was granted in favour of the respondent No.1 (Dead and represented by his Legal representatives) that the plaintiff/respondent No.1 had half of the share in the property plot No.36/3, area 459.25 square fe...
Smt. Nirmala Baiga Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
W.P.No.13237/2011 Smt. Nirmala Baiga vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 23.09.2013 Shri C.M.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondent/State. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 14.07.2011 by which the petitioner, who was a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Kamta, Janpad Panchayat Budhar, Tehsil Jaitpur, District Shahdol, has been removed on account of the fact that she was not complying with the directions issued by the higher authorities as well as the Collector. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Panchayat Karmi/Secretary of the said Gram Panchayat had been removed but he had obtained orders for his reinstatement from the Collector as well as the Commissioner. It is submitted that as the petitioner was directed to certify the signature of the said Panchayat Secretary against whom there were several complaints and who was repeatedly interfering in the functioning of the petitioner, the p...
Mukesh Chaturvedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
WRIT PETITION No.917/2012 1 23.09.2013 Shri Akash Choudhary, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondents-State. It is contended by learned Counsel for the parties that the issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered by a decision rendered by this Court, Bench at Indore, in W.P.No.7675/2011 (S).Diwakar Rao Rojaskar versus The State of M.P.& another, decided on 26.08.2013. It is not in dispute that after examining the records of the examination, this Court has reached to the conclusion that the allegations of irregularities committed in conducting the examination and declaring the results of persons like petitioner are serious in nature and, therefore, this Court has directed that revaluation of the answer-sheets of the persons like petitioner be conducted by constituting a two members independent Committee. In view of this, it is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the present writ petition can be disposed...
Rajkumar Jaiswal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
Criminal Appeal No.1889/2013 23/09/2013 Shri Sharad Verma, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Ashutosh Tiwari, PL for the respondent/State. Heard on I.A.No.17757/13, an application for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Appellant has been convicted by the trial Court under section 306 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years & fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulations. As per prosecution according to dying declaration itself it is alleged against this appellant that he used to hurl the abusive language against the deceased (his wife) therefore, she poured the kerosene oil and set to ablaze herself. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that trial Court committed the illegality in not appreciating the evidence in its proper perspective. It is further submitted that none of the ingredient u/s 107 of IPC proved against the appellant. The appeal would take considerable time to dispose of finally, hence he prays for suspension of jail sentence and gran...
Lallu Ram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
M.Cr.C.No.10617/2013 23.09.2013 Shri Parag S. Chaturvedi, Advocate for the applicants. Shri R.N.Yadav, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The applicants by this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.have challenged the proceedings pending before the JMFC Kotma District Anuppur in which a compromise application was filed by the complainant in the year 2011 and the trial Court did not decide that application within time, and therefore present petition is moved by the applicants to quash the proceedings as compromise took place between the parties. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the complainant filed a compromise application before the trial Court in the year 2011, however the trial Court adjourned the hearing of the application with the direction that the case may be listed along with the counter case. Thereafter the case w...
Alok Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
W.P.No.15307/2013 23.9.2013 Shri N.K.Mishra, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for State of M.P.on advance notice. Heard. Two fold reliefs are being sought by the petitioners who belong to Adhyapak cadre under Madhya Pradesh Samvarg (Niyojan Avam Sewa ki Shartein) Niyam, 2008, firstly to grant seniority from initial date of appointment as contract teacher and the second relief sought is the direction to respondents to accept the application for the post of Area Education Officer. Initially appointed as Contract Teachers in the year 2006 and 2007, the petitioners were designated as Adhyapak in pursuance to the promulgation of 2008 Rules. That, Government of M.P.through department of school education vide notification No.337 dated 25.7.2013 invited application for filling of posts of Area Education Officer through limited Departmental Examination. The eligibility prescribed vide notification being that the candidate should be working as uppe...
Smt. Kamlesh JaIn Vs. Smt. Kusum Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
1 W.P No.16060 o20. 9.2013 Shri Ashok Lalwani, counsel for the petitioner. He is heard on the question of admission. The petitioner/plaintiff has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 23.7.13 (Annex.P/6) passed by the III Civil Judge-II, Mandla passed in C.S.No.44-A/12 whereby his application filed under order 26 rule 9 of the CPC for appointment of Commissioner and calling the demarcation report of the disputed land, has been dismissed till the extent of appointment of Commissioner and calling such report with observation that in the light of the demarcation report carried out by the revenue officer at the instance of the petitioner and filed with the suit, the petitioner shall be at liberty to call and examine the concerning revenue inspector who carried out and prepared such report.2. Shri Ashok Lalwani, learned appearing counsel of the petitioner after taking me through the averments of the petition and the papers plac...
Manoj Choudhary Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
Writ Petition No.16340/2013 20.09.2013 Shri Sushil Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Sheetal Dubey, learned Govt. Adv for respondent no.1 to 5. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner, Ex-Sarpanch of Gram Panchyat Chaka, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 23.8.2013, passed by Additional Commissioner, Jabalpur in Revision Case No.346/B-121/2011-12, whereby modifying the order dated 30.1.2012 passed by the Collector, Katni passed in appeal No.06/Appeal /11-12, affirming the order dated 18.11.2011, passed by the SDO, Katni in Case No.6902/B-121/11-12, whereby the petitioner has been removed by virtue of Section 40 of M.P.Gram Panchyat Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam from the post of Sarpanch with some directions to recover the sum misappropriated by him and his Secretary Manish Paroha, remitted back the matter to the SDO with some direction to decide afresh with the direction that recovery proceedi...
Balmik Prasad Tripathi Vs. Mangleshwar Prasad Tripathi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
Writ Petition No.1125/2013 20.09.2013 Shri R.S.Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. He is heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 1.11.2012, (Ann. P-6) passed by the Civil Judge, Class-II, Rampur Baghelan, in Co.No.46-A/10, whereby the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 of CPC for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the suit has not been filed by the respondents on the valuation of the consideration as stated in the sale deed, which was executed by the seller in favour of the present petitioner and the court fee was also not paid accordingly, has been dismissed. Having heard the counsel, I have carefully gone through the record and papers placed on record. It is apparent that the present respondents plaintiffs are not party to the alleged document of the sale deed and such sale deed has been executed by some other person in favour of the present pe...
Dr. Manoj Kumar Dubey Vs. Dr. Raghuraj Singh Chouhan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
1 M.Cr.C. No.12311/2009 M.Cr.C. No.1410/2010 M.Cr.C. No.11006/2011 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SB: HON. SHRI N.K.GUPTA,J Misc. Criminal Case No.12311/2009 Dr. Manot Kumar Dubey. -Vs- Dr. Raghuraj Singh Chouhan & another. Misc. Criminal Case No.1410/2010 Dr. R.D.Thakur. -Vs- Dr. Raghuraj Singh Chouhan & others. Misc. Criminal Case No.11006/2011 Dr. Raghuraj Singh Chouhan. -Vs- Rakesh Kumar Pandey. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In M.Cr.C.No.12311/2009 Shri Prakash Upadhay, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Dharmendra Soni, Advocate for the respondent No.1. Shri Akshay Namdeo, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.2-State. In M.Cr.C.No.1410/2010 Shri Rohit Sohgaura, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Dharmendra Soni, Advocate for the respondent No.1. Shri Prakash Upadhyay, Advocate for the respondent No.2. Shri Anil Khare, Sr. Advocate with Shri Ajay Dubey, Advocate for the respondent No.3. In M.Cr.C.No.11006/2011 Shri ...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »