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.
Mohd. Ashif Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3859/2013 M.Cr.C.No.3859/2012 20.9.2013 Shri Hakim Khan, Advocate for the applicant. Shri S.D.Khan, G.A.for the State/respondent. The applicant has challenged the various orders relating to seizure of truck bearing registration No.RJ142G-5186, which was seized by Police Station Kishangarh, District Chhatarpur for offence punishable under M.P.Gauvansh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2010 and other offences. The facts of the case, in short, are that, a truck bearing registration No.RJ142-G-5186 was seized by the Police Station Kishangarh relating to offence under M.P.Gauvansh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2010. The applicant has moved an application for supurdginama before the trial Court but, it was dismissed on 6.3.2012. He also moved an application before the Collector, Chhatarpur but, vide order dated 3.7.2012, the learned District Magistrate stayed the proceedings of the confiscation. In criminal revision No.14/2012, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bijawar, District Chhatarpur, dismiss...
Rakesh Prajapati Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.14029/2013 (Ganesh Prasad Prajapati..versus State of MP and otheRs.02-09-2013 Heard Shri M. Adil Usmani, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 15-7-2013 by which he has been transferred as Secretary, Gram Panchayat Hathwansh to Gram Samnapur, District Chhatarpur. It is alleged that the impugned transfer order has been passed in violation of the transfer policy formulated by the State Government under M.P.Panchayatraj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 as the transfer policy states that no transfer order can be passed after the expiry of May and June only after conducting due enquiry which is not done in the petitioner's case. It is also alleged that the petitioner has been transferred about 25 kilometers away from the place where the petitioner is presently working. A Division Bench of this Court in R.S.Chaudhary versus State of M.P.and OtheRs.ILR [2007].MP1329has a...
South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
1 WP. No 8368/2013 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sujoy Paul Writ Petition No.8368/2013 South Eastern Coal Field Ltd. Versus Union of India Writ Petition No.14975/2012 N.P. Sahu Versus Union of India & Others. Writ Petition No.19276/2012 S. Nagachari Versus Union of India & Others Writ Petition No.19376/2012 R.K. Kasliwal Versus Union of India & Anr. Writ Petition No.19476/2012 B.A. Prasad Versus Union of India & Others Writ Petition No.19598/2012 R.N. Verma Versus Union of India & Others. Writ Petition No.19600/2012 P.R. Tripathi Versus Union of India & Others 2 WP. No 8368/2013 Writ Petition No.19603/2012 Gurukripal Singh Jolly Versus Union of India & Others Writ Petition No.19794/2012 Sanjay Kumar Versus Union of India & Another Writ Petition No.4156/2013 R.K. Acharya Versus Union of India & Others Writ Petition No.4326/2013 Sanjay Kumar Mishra Versus Union of India & Another Writ Petition No.12379/2013 South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd...
Smt. Anisha Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.15144/2013 (Smt. Anisha Patel & ORS.versus State of MP & Ors.) 20.09.2013 Shri B.K.Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondent/State. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioneRs.who are holders of B.Ed. Degree and had participated in the selection process for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III, have filed this petition stating that they have not been permitted to participate in the process of selection. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and after a perusal of the petition, it is observed on a statement to that effect being made by the learned counsel for the State, that similar petitions, wherein the petitioners had raised the same issue, have been dismissed by this Court with observations in the case of Sanyogita Thakur and others v. State of M.P.and otheRs.reported in 2013 (2) MPLJ206 and without any observations in the case of Jai Prakash Naray...
Vinod Mishra and ors. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
Criminal Appeal No.279/1998. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.279/1998 Appellants :1. Vinod Mishra s/o Ramawatar Mishra, aged about 30 years 2. Rambali Mishra s/o Hiralal Mishra, aged about 35 years 3. Chanda @ Chandra Bhan Mishra, s/o Ramawatar, aged about 30 years All cultivators and residents of village Badera, P.S. Brajpur, District-Panna.4. Micchu s/o Jhalim Gond, aged aobut 35 years, Cultivator, resident of Village Shahpura, Police Station Brajpur, District-Panna Vs. Respondent : The State of Madhya Pradesh Present: Hon. Shri Justice B.D.Rathi For appellants : Shri Shivam Singh, 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 9/1/1998 passed by Special Judge, Panna in Special Case No.52/97, whereby appellant nos. 1 and 2 have been convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Cod...
Civtect [1] Private Limited Vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
1 Civtect (I) PVT.LTD.versus Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.A.C. Nos.15/12, 16/12 and 18/12 20/09/13 Shri V.R.Rao, learned Sr.counsel with Shri S. Rao, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Abhijeet Bhowmik, learned counsel for the non- applicant. As common questions of law and facts are involved in all these applications filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 they are being disposed of by this common order. In A.C.No.15/12, a contract was awarded to the petitioner for construction and execution of certain civil work pertaining to 220 KV sub-station vide work order dated 1/01/03, particulars of which are given in para 1 of the application. Similarly, in A.C.No.16/12, a contract was given to the petitioner with regard to certain civil work in the matter of 400/220 KV sub-station at Thruvananthapuram vide work order dated 2/01/03 and third case i.e.A.C.No.18/12, work was given to the petitioner Co.by the non-applicant in the matter of construction again ...
M/S Raj Seeds Traders,a-7 B.D.A.Colony Tulsi Nagar Vs. Madhya Pradesh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
1 M/s Raj Seeds Traders versus Madhya Pradesh State Agro Industries Development Corporation.A.C. No.8/13 20/09/13 Shri Mahendra Pateriya, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Vijay Shukla, learned counsel for the non-applicant. This application has been filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal for resolution of the dispute between the parties. Applicant herein M/s Raj Seeds Traders is a proprietary concerned having its office in Tulsi Nagar, Bhopal and this application is filed by the Proprietor Rajkumar Gupta. It is the case of the applicant that M.P.State Agro Industries Development Corporation is an instrumentality of the state and is assigned and appointed as a Nodal agency in the matter of job inviting rate contract offers in respect of seeds and supply of the same to various authorities and departments of the State Govt. It is said that the agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the sai...
Shri Sarayoo Prasad Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.16097/2013 (S.P.Patel versus State of MP and otheRs.20.09.2013 Heard Shri Rohit Sohgaura, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 02.09.2013 by which he has been transferred from Kusami to Balaghat. It is submitted that it amounts to frequent transfer as he has been transferred four times within a span of one year. The petitioner also alleges that he has been transferred in violation of the transfer policy. It is also stated that the transfer might affect the seniority of the petitioner as he has been transferred to some other Division. A Division Bench of this Court in R.S.Chaudhary versus State of M.P.and OtheRs.ILR [2007].MP1329has already held that in case transfer is alleged to be contrary to the policy, the appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to approach the authority themselves by filing a representation. In view of the aforesaid, without entering into the...
Sunil Maheshwari Vs. Mohd. Iqbal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.A.No.1954/2012 20/9/2013 Shri Ashok Lalwani, Adv.for the appellant. Shri Ashish Shroti, Adv.for the respondents. Heard on I.A.No.8467/2012 which is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the delay of 405 days has occurred as after passing of the impugned order, the appellant remained out of town of Bhopal for more than a period of 3 months and while on journey he also fell ill, therefore, he could not contact his counsel and could not know the progress of the suit. On request of appellant, lawyer sent a copy of the impugned order which was received by one of the domestic helps and was not brought to the knowledge of the appellant. The appellant came across the postal envelope containing the copy on 1.7.2012 and thereafter the appeal is filed. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that for condonation of delay there is settled view of Honble Apex Court and High Courts that liberal approach s...
Sanjay Moghe Vs. M.P.State Minor Forest Produce Coop. Andan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.(s)No.3361/2004 Sanjay Moghe versus M.P.State Minor Forest Produce Cooperation Federation LTD.& Ors 20/09/2013 Shri Vipin Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner. Even though, this writ petition is pending since 2004, it is yet to be admitted and notice issued. It is listed today for admission. Challenge in this writ petition is made to a concurrent orders passed by the Dy. Registrar Cooperative Society, Joint Registrar Cooperative Society and the M.P.State Cooperative Tribunal, dismissing a service dispute raised by the petitioner under Section 55 of the M.P.Cooperative Societies Act. It is case of the petitioner that he was appointed as a Daily Wages Employee on 16.9.1989 for a period of 89 days. Annexure- P1 is the order of appointment. He continued to work upto 30th of August, 1993, when on the ground that services no more required, his services were terminated. The petitioner challenged the same before the Dy. Registrar Cooperative Society in a proceeding initiated by him un...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »