Madhya Pradesh Court January 2014 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.
Smt. Renuka Dhoshi Vs. Smt. Rama Telang Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Sh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
1 W.P.No.19942/2013 Smt. Renuka Doshi & ORS.versus Smt. Rama Telang & ORS.20.01.2014 Shri Rajesh Patel, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Heard on the question of admission. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 9.7.2013 passed by the 21st Civil Judge Class-II, Bhopal in Civil Suit No.256-A/2009, whereby the application filed by the petitioners for framing additional issues has been rejected. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners in the present case has filed the suit assailing the validity of sale deed dated 20.2.2009 and has sought for a declaration to the effect that it be declared null and void. It is submitted that an issue in that regard has also been framed by the court below. However, subsequently the petitioners have also raised an issue regarding the validity of the Power of Attorney on the basis of which the sale deed was executed and on that count had moved an application seeking framing of additi...
Premlal Mahobiya Vs. Secretary School Education Department the State o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
W.P.No.883/2014 (Premlal Mahobiya and others versus State of MP and otheRs.20.01.2014 Shri B.K.Upadhyaya,, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Manoj Kushwaha, learned P.L.for the State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioneRs.who are the Assistant Teacher have filed this petition claiming the benefit of regular pay scale from the date of regular appointment in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench at Indore Bench of this Court, in W.A.No.346/2008 (Smt. Usha Ranawat versus State of M.P.and others).dated 18-12-2008. By the aforesaid order passed, more than 25 writ appeals claiming similar benefits were decided and it was directed that the benefit of pay fixation in the regular pay scale from the date of regular appointment shall be given to the petitioners therein. In fact the Division Bench has upheld the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various cases and while deciding the writ appeals in para-19 the following directions were i...
Smt. Kheek Bai Vs. Union of India Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Jus ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
1 Misc. Appeal No. 3392 Of 2009 20.1.2014 Smt. Shweta Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Govind Patel, learned counsel for the respondent on advance notice. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties heard finally. Question which crops up for consideration in the present appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against an order dated 4.4.2008 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Bench at Bhopal in O.A. No. 108/2004 as to whether the Tribunal is justified in awarding interest @ 6 % on default within a period of 60 days/two months is no more res integra. In Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi & ors v. Union of India and another (AIR 2009 SC 3098), it is held by their Lordships: 16. It is, therefore, clear that the Court, while making a decree for payment of money is entitled to grant interest at the current rate of interest or contractual rate as it deems reasonable to be paid on the principal ...
Keshar Singh Vs. M.P. Padamnabhan Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Jus ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
1 W.P.No.15503/2013 Keshar Singh & ORS.versus M.P.Padamnabha & ORS.20.01.2014 Smt. Amrit Ruprah, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Heard on the question of admission. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 30.7.2013 by which the petitioneRs.application under Order 6 Rule 7 CPC, for amendment of the written statement has been dismissed. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioneRs.relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal and Others vs.K.K. Modi and otheRs.AIR2006SC1647 that as the amendment sought to be made by the petitioners/defendants is necessary for adjudicating the dispute involved in the suit which has been filed by the plaintiffs for specific performance, therefore, the court below has erred in law in rejecting the application on irrelevant grounds. It is submitted that the petitioners have taken up the plea that at the time of execution of the agreement which is sought to be exe...
Rudrapal Singh [Deceased] Lrs Vimla Singh Vs. Zila Shahkari Kendriya B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
W.P.NO.10269/2012 20/01//2014 None appears for the petitioner. This petition was filed in the year 2012 and is yet to be admitted. The matter was listed on 18-07-2012 when the learned counsel for the petitioner took time to file certain judgments. Today when the case is taken up, none appears and therefore we have perused the record and are deciding the matter based on material available on record. In this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenge is made to an order dated 13-02-2012, passed by the M.P.Co-operative Tribunal in FiRs.Appeal No.29/2008, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent/Bank under the provisions of M.P.Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 has been allowed and an order passed by the competent authority namely Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rewa in a proceedings held under section 55(2) read with section 64 of the Cooperative Societies Act,1960 has been interfered with. Facts in brief go to show that the petitioners herein are the ...
Praveen Kumar Vs. Principal Secretary Home Deptt. the State of Madhya ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
1 W.P.No.827/2014 Praveen Kumar versus State of M.P.& ORS.20.01.2014 Shri Pushpendra Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondent no.2 to issue a fresh merit list for appointment on the post of Inspector / Subedar/ Sub-Inspector SB/Platoon Commander pursuant to the selection procedure undertaken by them. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent no.2 had undertaken the Police Recruitment Test in the year 2012 in respect of which there were several complaints and, therefore, the Special Task Force is conducting an enquiry in the matter and has lodged a fiRs.information report against several persons including the officers and candidates. It is submitted that on account of the aforesaid, the result has not been declared and, therefore, the respondent authorities be directed to either declare the result or to cancel the selection and initia...
Mohammad Ayub Vs. Abdul Rab Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice R ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2014
1 W.P.No.871/2014 Mohammad Ayub versus Abdul Rab & ORS.20.01.2014 Shri D.K.Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondent Board to consider and decide the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, filed by the respondents, by taking into consideration the petitioner's reply filed on 5.3.2013 and 5.8.2013 as expeditiously as possible. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents have filed a revision before the Board of Revenue which has been registered as Revision No.R-4062-I/2012 against the order passed by the Commissioner in which initially on 5.12.2012 the Board of Revenue has issued notices on the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act and had also granted interim stay. It is submitted that thereafter the petitioner filed a reply to the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act as well as for vacating stay on...
Manohar Dutt Pathak Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
W.P.No.13165/2013 17/01/2014 Shri HaRs.Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is heard finally. The short controveRs.involved in this writ petition is as regards to release of difference of pay to the petitioner who is a retired employees and senior citizen. The petitioner refers to Annexure-P/4 dated 01/05/2009, a communication under signature of Commissioner, Public Instructions, addressed to District Education Officer, Katni requiring the authority thereunder to supply requisite information as regards payment payable to the Principal of Higher Secondary Schools in the pay scale of Rs.2375-4125/-. The petitioner submits that he was also the Principal of Kymore Higher Secondary School, Kymore, Distt. Katni where from he was retired. The information sought also was with reference to the admissibility of payment to the petitioner. It appears nothing h...
Asha Tejaswani Swa Sahayata Samuh Vs. Collector Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
W.P.No.17591/2013 Astha Tejaswani Swa Sahayata Samuh versus The Collector & ORS.17/01/2014 Shri Rahul Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondents/State. Challenging the order dated 24.9.2013 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Kirnapur, District-Balaghat in the matter of cancelling the Mid Day Meal contract of the petitioner, this writ petition has been filed. Petitioner was granted a contract for preparation of Mid Day Meal for distribution to the students of the Government Middle School Sewati, Tahsil-Kirnapur, District-Balaghat. It is said that due to rivalry by certain other intending committees and vested interest, in an arbitrary manner and without following due process of law, the contract of the petitioner has been cancelled. It is said that the cancellation has been ordered on malafide consideration, therefore, the same is unsustainable. Respondents have filed the return and it is pointed o...
Abdul Salam Qureshi Vs. Dayanand Jaiswal Judgement Given By: Hon'ble S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
1 Cr.R No.1991 of 2012 17.01.2014 Shri S.K.P.Verma, counsel for the applicant. He is heard on the question of admission. The applicant/ accused has filed this revision under section 397/401 read with section 482 of the Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the order dated 22.9.12 passed by the ACJM, Singrauli in Case No.159/09 whereby allowing the application of the respondent/ complainant filed under section 65 of the Evidence Act, he has been permitted to lead the secondary evidence with respect of the disputed cheque and other documents. 2. The applicant counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition as well as the papers placed on the record along with the impugned order argued that the impugned complaint was filed in the year 2007 and since then till the date of filing the impugned application, at any point of time, it was not mentioned on record that such cheque and other papers have been stolen in some theft from his place and at the stage of the evidence, by mentioning such ...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »