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.
Ramesh Kumar Chaturvedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 W.P No.15524 o17. 9.2013 Shri P.C.Chandak, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amit Sharma, counsel for respondents No.1 and 3. Heard on the question of admission. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ for the following reliefs :- (a) It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to assess proper compensation of the entire acquired land, bore-well and trees and pay the same to the petitioner with interest within the stipulated period. (b) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. (c ) Costs of the petition be awarded to the petitioner. Having heard the counsel on admission, keeping in view the arguments advanced, after perusing the record, in the available circumstances, instead to admit or issue any notice to the other side, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the authorities of the...
Tilak Raj Bajaj Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 W.P.No.14997/2013. 17.9.2013. Shri Ajeet Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ashok Chourasiya, learned G.A.for the respondent/ State. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India for issuing appropriate writ for following reliefs:1. It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to access proper compensation of the entire house, as well as the Pakka Dhaba, open land, the trees standing on the open land and tube well exists in the said land assess compensation according to the guidelines issued by the Collector, respondent No.1 to the petitioner with interest within the stipulated period.2. This Hon'ble Court be further pleased to pass any such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit under the circumstances of the case. Having heard the counsel keeping in view his arguments on perusing the record, I have found that the representations of the petitioner (Ann. P.4 and P5) ...
M/S Radha Vallabh Travels Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
Writ Petition No.15737/2013 (O) 17.09.2013 Shri Abhilash Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner. He is heard on the question of admission. The petitioner, Bus Operator has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ for the following reliefs:- 1. To common entire relevant record from the respondents for its kind perusal.2. To direct the respondents to decide the matter of the petitioner immediately.3. Any other relief which may deemed fit.4. Cost of the litigation. Petitioner's counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition and the papers placed on record, argued that the impugned application of the petitioner for grant of permission in relation to bus route has been heard by the authorities of respondent No.2 on 16.4.2013 and till today no order has been passed by such authority and prayed for appropriate direction to such authority on his application in accordance with procedure prescribed under the law on some early...
Dhirendra Kumar Pandya Vs. Vijay Singh Pandya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 W.P No.15569 o17. 9.2013 Shri Rahul Tripathi, counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 18.7.13 Annex.P/7 passed by the III Civil Judge Class-II Seoni in COS No.31-A/11 whereby the application of the respondent filed under Order 6 rule 17 of the CPC has been allowed.2. Petitioner counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition as well as the papers placed on the record argued that subsequent to filing the suit, petitioner has amended the suit for the prayer of declaration besides the prayer made at the initial stage in the suit. In consequence, respondent has filed the application for consequential amendment whereby besides the consequential amendment, some new facts has also been set-up by the respondent/ defendant which could not be allowed after filing the written statement but under the wrong premises, the same has been allowed by the trial court and prayed to set ...
Nabbi Bai Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 Cr.A. No.1086/1996 Cr.A. No.446 /1996 Cr.A. No.1087/1996 Cr.A.No.498/1996 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.1086/1996 Appellant Nabbibai, W/o Late Shankarlal, aged 35 years, R/o Udaipura, Tahsil-Udaipura, District Raisen. Vs. Respondent The State of Madhya Pradesh Criminal Appeal No.446/1996 Appellant Suresh @ Kresh, S/o Karodilal, aged 20 years, Labourer, R/o Udaipura, Tehsil -Udaipura, District Raisen. Vs. Respondent The State of Madhya Pradesh Criminal Appeal No.1087/1996 Appellant Kera W/o Jharru Adivasi, aged 35 years, R/o Udaipura, Tahsil- Udaipura, District Raisen. Vs. Respondent The State of Madhya Pradesh Criminal Appeal No.498/1996 Appellant Pappu S/o Jharru, aged 19 years, R/o Udaipura, Tahsil-Udaipura, District Raisen. Vs. Respondent The State of Madhya Pradesh. For the appellants: Shri Narendra Nikhare, Advocate. For the respondent-State : Shri S.K. Kashyap, Government Advocate. 2 Cr.A. No.1086/1996 Cr.A. No.446 /1996 Cr.A. No.1087/1996 Cr.A.No....
Pahal Singh Dhurve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 W.P.No.15235/13 (O).17.9.2013. Shri Paritosh Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondent/ State. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner/ has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for following reliefs:1. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be direct to the respondents to provide the transit passes as required without any delay.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be directed to the respondents to ensure the availability of transit passes for the all Panchayats of District Mandla.3. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper, including the cost of the litigation. Learned Dy. Advocate General submits that requisite transit passes have been made available to the Tahsildar Mandla and during the CouRs.of the day same will be issued to the petitioner, if he approaches to such authority. In view of such submission of learned Dy. Advocate General, the petiti...
Dilip Shivhare Vs. Smt. Lajwanti Devi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
F.A.No.540/2012 17/09/2013 Shri Ajay Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Satyam Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondents. I.A.No.10196/2013, an application filed by the appellant to say that the Rent Controlling Authority, Bhopal vide order dated 31.8.2013 has determined the standard rate of premises in question and, therefore, appellant not is not required to deposit the rent as agreed to in the agreement entered, only standard rate is to be recovered. Learned counsel for the respondents points out that against the order passed by the Rent Controlling Authority, an appeal is pending and at this stage, no such order should be passed. Considering the fact that as the appeal against the Rent Controlling Authority is pending, we see no reason to pass any order with regard to grant any benefit to the appellant. List the matter after six week for reconsideration of I.A.No.10196/2013 by which time, we hope that the appeal pending /against the fixation of standard rent would be...
Ramlal Dwivedi Vs. Badri Prasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
Writ Petition No.17316/2011 17.09.2013 Shri K.P.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Parag Chaturvedi, learned counsel for respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioneRs.plaintiffs have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 30.9.2011, (Ann. P-4) passed by the Vth Additional District Judge, Satna in MCA No.09/11 affirming the order dated 18.7.2011, (Ann. P-5) passed by Civil Judge, Class-2, Rampur Baghelan passed in Civil Suit No.256-A/10, whereby the application of the petitioners filed under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC for issuing temporary injunction restraining the respondents to interfere in possession of the petitioners with respect of the disputed land was dismissed. After arguing for some time on merits, in response of some query, the petitioneRs.counsel prayed to dispose of this petition with appropriate direction to the trial court to expedite the trial of the impugned suit with some time...
Jagbhan Singh Kushwaha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
W.P.No.14814/2013 (Jagbhan Singh Kushwaha and others versus State of MP and otheRs.17.09.2013 Heard Shri Udyan Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri S.M.Lal, learned G.A.for the State on advance copy on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by advertisement dated 08.08.2013 by the Collector-cum- District Election Officer, Tikamgarh calling for applications from the eligible candidates for appointment on temporary post created for election work. The petitioner have also filed this petition claiming absorption and regularization on services on the strength of several orders passed by this court in various petitions in relation to the persons working along with the petitioners at Tikamgarh. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were initially engaged for election work in the year 2008-09. It is stated that the State Government issued the circulars on 29.11.1973 and 29.11.1978 to ...
Jitendra Kuamr Dongre Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
M.Cr.C.No.7763/2007 M.Cr.C.No.7763/2007 17.9.2013 Shri Shobhitaditya, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.N.Yadav, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondent No.1. Shri V.K.Tyagi, Advocate for the respondent No.2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties finally. The applicant has moved a petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C.for quashment of FIR and charge-sheet submitted against the applicant dated 16.7.2007. The facts of the case, in short, are that, the respondent No.2 had filed an FIR against the applicant on 15.6.2007 and therefore, a case for offence punishable under sections 498-A, 506 of IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was registered against the applicant at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jabalpur. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the respondent No.2 was a quarrelsome lady, who left the house of the applicant soon after her marriage. Even she did not reside for the entire year. The applicant moved an application under section 9 of the Hindu Ma...
- ‹ Prev
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- Next ›
- Last »