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.
Akram HussaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
Writ Petition No.16474/13 20.09.2013 Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amit Sharma, learned P.L.for the State/respondents no.1 to 3 on advance notice. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner elected Carporator of Municipal Council Begamganj, District Raisen has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing the appropriate writ against the respondents for the following reliefs:- (1) Honble Court may kindly be pleased to quash impugned Notice Inviting Tender dated 24.8.2013 (Annexure-P-3) and direct the respondent authorities to float fresh Notice Inviting Tender by adhering to the Resolution dated 9.7.2013 (Annexure-P-1) passed Municipal Council, Begumganj, District Raisen, in the interest of justice. (2) That in the alternative and without prejudice, this Honble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to float a separate N.I.T.for construction of C.C.Road in Kasai Mohalla, situated in Ward ...
Nemi Chandra JaIn Vs. Mulayam Chandra Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
SA No.1453/2007 20/09/2013. Mr.Avinash Zargar, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr.Deepesh Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent. Heard on admission. This second appeal has been filed under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the appellant / defendant against the impugned judgment and decree dated 14.08.2007 passed by 10th Additional District Judge ( Fast Tract Court) Bhopal in Regular Civil Appeal No.147-A/2006 confirming the judgment and decree dated 21.03.2006 passed by 2nd Additional Civil Judge to the court of 1st Civil Judge Class-I, Bhopal in Civil Suit No.28-A/2006. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that there is concurrent finding of both the courts below and no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal, therefore, the appeal be dismissed. While, learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention towards the impugned judgment and decree in which it has been mentioned that the term in the family settlement with regard to perpetual ...
Riya Chawala Vs. Smt. Shashi Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
Writ Petition No.16272/13 20.09.2013 Shri Pranay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. He is heard on the question of admission. The petitioner-defendant no.1 has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 3.9.2013 (Annexure-P-13) passed by XIIth Civil Judge Class-I Bhopal, whereby her application filed under Order 8 Rule 1 a sub-Rule 3 of CPC for taking the annexed documents on record, has been dismissed. Initially the case was argued by the petitioners counsel for admission but in response of some query of the Court that except the certified copy of the order sheets/proceedings of the revenue Court how the other documents annexed with the application could have been taken by the trial Court on record for consideration at the stage of final arguments of the matter on which, instead to argue further, petitioners counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition as not pressed with liberty to challenge the impugned order w...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Shiv Sahu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.7444/2013 20.09.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, 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 28/2/2013 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen, in Sessions Trial No.164/2011, whereby the respondents have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 294, 302 in alternative 302 read with 34 and 506 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22/3/11 at about 11.30 p.m., respondents not only filthily abused complainant Prembai (PW2) and her son-in-law Rajkumar (since deceased).but, in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted Rajkumar with Lathis, who during treatment, succumbed to the injuries thus caused on 30/3/11. Report (Ex.P/8) of the incident, leading to registration of Crime No.13...
M/S Mahalinga Shetty and Com. Vs. Madhya Pradesh Elect. Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : AT JABALPUR Civil Revision No : 579 of 2003 M/s Mahalinga Shetty & Company - V/s - Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board. Civil Revision No : 580 of 2003 M/s Mahalinga Shetty & Company - V/s - Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board. Civil Revision No : 581 of 2003 M/s Mahalinga Shetty & Company - V/s - Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board. Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. Honble Justice (Smt) Vimla Jain. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In all the cases: Shri V.R.Rao, Senior Advocate, with Shri Shravan Rao for the applicants. Shri M.L.Jaiswal, Senior Advocate, with Shri K.K.Gautam for the non-applicants. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether approved for reporting: Yes / No.ORDER2009/2013 Per : Rajendra Menon, J:- As common questions of law and fact are involved in all these three revisions, which have been filed under section 19 of the Madhya Prad...
Surendra Prasad Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
Criminal Appeal No.2710/1997. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.2710/1997 Appellants : Surendra S/o Keshav Prasad Choubey Vs. Respondent : The State of Madhya Pradesh Present: Hon. Shri Justice B.D.Rathi For appellant : Shri S.K.Sharma, Advocate For the respondent : Shri C.K. Mishra, Government Advocate JUDGMENT ( 20.9.13) This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code.) has been preferred against the judgment dated 17/12/1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No.11/96, whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC.) and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for four months. Marriage of Aarti (since deceased) was solemnized with the appellant.2. According to the prosecution case, appellant persistently subjected Aarti to cruelty and harassment due to non satisfaction of demand for d...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Raghavbhan Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.5862/2013 20.09.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri P.Dharmadhikari, 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 21/2/2013 passed by Special Judge (under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short the Act)).Satna, in Special Case No.28/06, whereby respondents have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 436/34 or 436/149, 294, 506 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC) and Sections 3(1)(iv).3(1)(v).3(1)(xv).3(2)(iv) and 3(2)(v) of the Act. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 1/12/2005 at about 11 a.m., all the respondents came in front of the houses of complainant party and respondent No.1 Raghavbhan exhorted to set fire to the houses, upon which 13 houses were incinerated in the arso...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Sardar Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.240/2009 20.09.13 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 3/10/2008 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge (FTC).Khurai, District Sagar, in Sessions Trial No.100/2006, whereby respondents have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307 in alternative 307/149, 325 in alternative 325/149, 323 in alternative 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC).Prosecution case, in brief is that, respondents, armed with Pharsa, Lathi and stones constituted an un-lawful assembly and in furtherance of its common object, not only rioted but also caused injuries to Gulab, Parmanand, Bhaguntsingh, Virendra and Balkishan that were sufficient in the ordinary couRs.of nature to cause their death and someone...
M/S Shahpur Filling Station Shahpur Distt. Burhanpur Vs. Bharat Petrol ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
1 W.P.No.14852/13. 20.9.2013. Shri Manikant Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri V.R.Rao, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Kapil Jain, learned counsel the respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner/ has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ against the respondents for following reliefs. 1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to resume sale and supply at the retail outlet of the petitioner. 2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the notice of termination dated 1.11.2012 (Ann. P.2).3. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction. I am apprised by the Senior counsel of the respondents that this petition is filed at premature stage only against show cause notice while further proceeding of s...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Mohd. Shaqil
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.5863/2013 20.09.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, 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 20/3/2013 passed by Special Judge (under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short the Act)).Sehore, in Special Case No.34/2010, whereby respondent no.1 Mohd. Shakeel has been acquitted of the offences under Sections 366, 376(1) and 384 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC).respondent nos.2 and 3 Manish Kumar and Ketan Soni of the offences under Sections 366 and 384 of the IPC and respondent Nos.4 and 5 namely Brijkishore and Vijay have been acquitted of the offence under Section 363 of the IPC and all of them have also been acquitted of the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act. Prosecution case, in br...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »