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.
Pawan Kumar Barman Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
Pawan Kumar Barma versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.6458 / 2012 10.1.2014: Shri Surendra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Kaurav, learned Dy. Advocate General and Shri Aditya, learned counsel for respondents. Petitioner was granted admission in LLB couRs.(three years semester Course) for the academic session 2008-2009. The petitioner was prevented from appearing in the 5th Semester Examination which was held in the year 2010-2011 on the ground that petitioner is short of aggregate in the third semester examination. The result of the 4th semester examination was also not declared, on such consideration petitioner have cleared the fiRs.year i.e.1st semester and 2nd semester. The controveRs.involved in the matter is with regard to counting of the aggregate. The question is as to whether the aggregate has to be counted based on marks received in each semester separately or marks received in particular year. The question was considered by a Division Bench of this...
Munna Alias Ramsevak Kumahar Vs. Smt.Anusuiya Kol Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
M.A.No.1875/2008 Munna @ Ramsevak Kumhar versus Smt. Anusuiya Kol & ORS.10/01/2014 Shri Aditya Ahiwasi, learned counsel for the appellant. None is present for the respondents. This is an appeal filed under Section 30(1)(aa) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. This Court has referred the matter for mediation on 12.9.2012. A report has been received from the mediator, which goes to show that the parties have appeared before the mediator on 15.3.2013. The Appellant Munna @ Ramsevak Kumhar was present in person and the respondents were represented by Smt. Anusuiya Kol, one of the respondents and after mediation, the dispute involved in this appeal was resolved in the following manner : 1. Appellant has agreed to pay sum of Rs.1,00000/- only (One Lac Rupees Only) as compensation through demand draft in favour of Respondent No.1 Anusuiya Kol, Respondent No.2 Arun Kol and Respondent No.3 Archana Kol on dt. 04.04.2013. 2. Appellant shall withdraw his appeal. 3. No further litigation shall...
Smt. Reshma Anjum Vs. Mohammed Imran @ Immu Judgement Given By: Hon'bl ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
Cr.R.No.2478/2013 10.1.2014 Shri Tabrez Khan, counsel for the applicant. Heard on admission. The applicant has challenged the order dated 9.10.2012 passed by the FiRs.Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in MJ.No.67 of 2012 whereby the maintenance application of the applicant was dismissed. The facts of the case in short are that the marriage of the applicant and the respondent took place on 21.12.2005. The applicant gave birth to a female child on 2.10.2006. She was residing with her parents since the year 2006 and thereafter, in the year 2012, she has filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.The trial Court examined the witnesses. The applicant examined herself only from her side whereas, the respondent did not appear before the trial Court to examine himself and therefore, no evidence was adduced from the side of the respondent. The learned Additional Principal Judge after considering the evidence of the applicant dismissed the application for maintenance. ...
Smt. Asha Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
Writ Petition No :: 210 / 2014 (s) Smt. Asha Tiwari and others versus State of MP and others 10.01.2014. Shri S.N.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General, for the respondents/State. Petitioners claim grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioners 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 initial date of appointment shall be made 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 issued by the Division Bench: 19. In vi...
Shyamlal Mukharya Vs. Ram Chandra Adatiya Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
W.P.No.1920/2010 Shyamlal Mukharya versus Ram Chandra Adatiya & ORS.10/01/2014 Shri Neeraj Ashar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is made to an order dated 6.1.2010 passed by the 6th Additional District Judge, Sagar in Civil Suit No.42-A/2009. By the said order, an application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC has been rejected. Petitioner and one Shri Satyapal Thakur filed the suit in question against Respondent No.1 for declaration of their title and certain decree of permanent injunction. During the pendency of the Civil Suit, Defendant No.7 sold the part of the property to one Shri Vimal Kumar Singhai and Smt. Sangita Jain. Petitioner, therefore, filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading the subsequent purchasers as a party. It is this application, which has been dismissed by the trial court. Even though, learned counsel tried to emphasize that the subsequent purchasers wer...
Jag Mohan Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
W.P.No.19676/2013 10/01/2014 Shri Sameer Seth, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Manoj Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. The petitioner is a retired person. He is senior citizen of 71 years of age. He is retired from the Department of Agriculture, State of Madhya Pradesh where he was transferred on allocation to the State of Chhattisgarh in the year 2000. The petitioner submits that for the period of 12/8/1986 to 25/10/1997 he had served the corresponding Department of Agriculture in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh, however, he has not been extended the benefit of leave encashment of the aforesaid period. The grievance of the petitioner is that his aforesaid period of service has not been taken into consideration by the State of Chhattisgarh in the matter of fixing of pension, this is purportedly for the reason that his service for the aforesaid period has not been considered for want of availability of service book. However, the petitioner, in this writ ...
Garima Gas Agency Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPLE SEAT AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No.46/2012 M/s Garima Gas Agency, Itarsi ... Petitioner Versus M/s Indian Oil Corporation & others Respondents CORAM Hon. Shri Justice A. M. Khanwilkar, Chief Justice Hon. Shri Justice Krishn Kumar Lahoti Whether approved for reporting ?. Shri P.N.Dubey, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Virendra Verma, Advocate for the respondent No.1. _________________________________________________________ ORDER (ORAL) (10/01/2014) Per A.M. Khanwilkar, Chief Justice : This petition takes exception to the Notification dated 16th November, 2011, Annexure P/1, whereby the Indian Oil Corporation intended to allot the distributorship at Itarsi, District Hoshangabad, which is presently managed by the petitioner. 02. The background in which the said Notification has been issued is that the petitioner was allotted distributorship for area of Hoshangabad (within municipal limits) vide Memorandum of Agreement dated 31st March, 1994. Lat...
Kailash Nath Namdeo Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
Writ Petition No.375/2014 ( K.N.Namdeo Vs..State of M.P.& otheRs.10-01-2014 Heard Shri Ajeet Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking similar relief as has been granted to one Uma Shankar Dwivedi, who had filed W.P.No.5458/2011 which was allowed by this Court on 4-3-2013. The petitioner in the present petition claims applicability of the similar service conditions to the petitioner as applicable to the employees of M.P.S.E.B.It is submitted that similar claim has been allowed by this Court in W.P.No.5458/2011 decided on 4-3-2013 which has been affirmed by a Division Bench of this Court by order dated 19-12-2013 passed in W.A.No.425/2013 and, therefore, the respondents be directed to confer similar benefits to the petitioner. It is, however, observed that the petitioner has directly approached this Court without approaching the respondent/authorities and, therefore, the question as to whether the petit...
A.R. Jaya Prasad Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
Writ Petition No.21826/2013 10/01/2014 : Smt. Sarita Chourasiya, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Piyush Jain, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. Petitioner was employee in the establishment of M.P.State Cooperative Oil Seed Growers Federation. Due to financial crisis in the Corporation, services of the petitioner were sent on deputation to the Panchayat Department and since then petitioner is working in the Panchayat Department. Claiming revision of pay and benefit of the recommendations made by the 5th and 6th Pay Commission, petitioner has filed this writ petition and record indicate that similar employees like the petitioner who are not granted the benefit of 5th Pay Commission recommendation approached this Court by filing W.P.No.5680/2009 (s) - Dinkar Pratap Singh Chauhan & Others versus State of M.P.& Others and a learned Single Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.3.2011 allowed the petition and directed the respondents to grant necessary benefits to the petit...
Ku. Urmila Maravi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
Ku. Urmila Maravi versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.19232 / 2011 10.1.2014: Shri Surendra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Kaurav, learned Dy. Advocate General and Shri Aditya, learned counsel for respondents. Petitioner was granted admission in LLB couRs.(three years semester Course) for the academic session 2008-2009. The petitioner was prevented from appearing in the 5th Semester Examination which was held in the year 2010-2011 on the ground that petitioner is short of aggregate in the third semester examination. The result of the 4th semester examination was also not declared, on such consideration petitioner have cleared the fiRs.year i.e.1st semester and 2nd semester. The controveRs.involved in the matter is with regard to counting of the aggregate. The question is as to whether the aggregate has to be counted based on marks received in each semester separately or marks received in particular year. The question was considered by a Division Bench of thi...
- ‹ Prev
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- Next ›
- Last »