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. Inda Bai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
1 W.P. No. 12483/2013 8.1.2014 Shri Ghanshyam Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Bramhadatt Singh, Panel Lawyer for respondent State of M.P. on advance notice. With consent the matter is heard finally. Petitioner, widow of retired Government servant has filed this petition against nongrant of family pension. Husband of the petitioner, employed as Deputy Forester in the Forest Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.6.1997. He died on 6.3.2012. After death of her husband petitioner filed an application for grant of family pension. That, her matter was referred to Treasury Office, Mandla; however, since no action has been taken by respondents the same has forced the petitioner to file this petition seeking direction to respondents to release family pension in favour of petitioner. O...
Lakhpati Bais Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
Writ Petition No.226 / 2014 ( Lakhpati Bais & others . Vs..State of M.P.& others ) 08-01-2014 Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Akash Chaudhary, learned P.L.for the State/respondents. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that in terms of the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Janpad Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998, the petitioners would be entitled to grant of regular pay scale of the post of Shiksha Karmi. However, such a claim is not being considered, therefore, this writ petition is required to be filed. It is contended that identical claim was made before the Indore Bench of this Court in W.P.No.602/2010 (S) by certain teachers of the similar category namely Mohanlal & others and the said writ petition has been disposed of vide order dated 22.01.2010 directing consideration of the claim of the persons like petitioneRs.It is, thus, contended that similar treatment may be given to the petitioneRs.This C...
Santosh Kumar Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
Writ Petition No.174 / 2014 ( Santosh Kumar Verma . Vs..State of M.P.& otheRs.08-01-2014 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 whet...
S.B . Vyas Vs. Madhya Pradesh Housing and Infrastrucrte Judgement Give ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
Writ Petition No.20288 / 2013 (S.B.Vyas...Vs..MP Housing & Infrastructure Development Board, Bhopal & ors.) 08-01-2014 Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the respondent/authorities are proceeding to deduct royalty from the mineral which is used by him as a contractor for construction purposes. By relying a decision rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.14265/2010, decided on 8-10-2010 the petitioner submits that similar directions be issued in the present case also. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the record it is observed that in view of the Madhya Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2006, the petitioner is required to purchase mineral from a person holding a mining lease or quarry or a person who has been given licence for storing mineral under the said provisions. The Rules o...
Nagendra Prasad Vs. Chhotelal Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2014
Writ Petition No.2298/2013 07/01/2014 Shri Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is by the plaintiffs/petitioneRs.who have applied for amendment in their plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC').The said application has been rejected by the impugned order. The notices of this writ petition were issued to the respondents/defendants. The same were served on them, but none has appeared on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4. The respondent No.5 is only a formal party being the State of Madhya Pradesh, as no relief is claimed against the State. The petitioners filed a suit for grant of permanent injunction against the respondents alleging that in part of the land belonging to the petitioneRs.the defendants No.1 to 4 have made encroachment and in some of the area they are obstructing the free way to the petitioneRs.During pendency of the said suit, since a tempor...
Khusiram Awasthy Vs. Sahab Singh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Just ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2014
1 SA No.973 of 2012 07.01.2014 None for the appellant. Shri S.P.Singh, counsel for the respondent No.1. None for respondent No.2. The appellant has filed this appeal against dismissal of his application filed under Order 21 rule 97 of the CPC in connection of the execution proceedings of the decree passed in favor of respondent No.1 in some civil suit and in such decree the respondent No.2 is a judgment debtor and, therefore, in the available scenario of the matter, this appeal could be adjudicated effectively on merits only in presence of the appellant and respondent No.1 and, presence of respondent No.2 is not required. Even otherwise, I am apprised by the counsel of respondent No.1 that in the aforesaid application of Order 21 rule 97 of the CPC, respondent No.2 was proceeded ex-parte before the trial court as well as before the appellate court. So, in such premises, notice of this appeal against respondent No.2 is hereby dispensed with if the same has not been served. 2. This case ...
Dr. Shailendra Khambra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2014
Writ Petition No.16324/2006. 7.1.2014. Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.K.Chourasiya, learned Government Advocate for the respondent-State of M.P.None for the proposed intervener. Matter is taken up in the second round along with connect- ed Writ Petitions No.16263/06, 16294/06, 16340/06, 16341/06, 16346/06, 16348/06, 16632/06, 16633/06, 16634/06 and 16640/06. It transpires from the previous order-sheets that by or- der-dated 23.2.2010, the petition was directed to be listed along with W.P.No.4743/2009 (PIL).However, subsequently, the Divi- sion Bench of this Court, by its order-dated 2.11.2012, had direct- ed the petition to be posted before a single Judge as per roster. At the outset, it is contended by learned counsel for the pe- titioner that the issue involved in the present petition was also a subject-matter of batch of Writ Petitions No.16631/06, 16338/06, 17043/06, 17044/06 and 17045/06, wherein the petitioners had called in question the order-da...
Harilal Vs. Bramhabai Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2014
S.A.No.1140/2012 7.1.2014 Shri K.B.Bhatnagar, learned counsel with Ms.Stuti Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the appellant. Heard on admission. Perused the records. This Second Appeal at the instance of plaintiff directed against the order dated 20.9.2012 passed by Second Additional District Judge, Mandla rejecting the application for condonation of delay of eleven months in filing an appeal against Judgment and Decree date 29.4.2011 passed in Civil Suit No.45 A/2009; consequently, dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment and decree by the trial Court. The suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff was for declaration of title and consequential relief of perpetual injunction in respect of suit land of KhaSr.Nos.76, 281, 272, 316, 285 and 303 area 1.420, 0.259, 0.410, 0.090, 4.480 and 2.890 total area 9.290 hectare in village Bodasilli tehsil and District Mandla M.P.and for declaring the sale deed executed by respondent No.1 and 2 in favour of respondents No.3, 4 and 5 as null and void...
Shivram Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2014
1 W.P.No.21914/2013 7/1/2014. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 3 on advance notice. Challenging the order dated 12.11.2013 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Sagar, in the matter of directing fresh appointment to the post of Panchayat Karmi in the panchayat in question, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Proceedings were initiated by the Gram Panchayat for appointment to the panchayat in question. It seems that the Gram Panchayat proposed for appointment of respondent No.7 Shri Heeralal as a Panchayat Karmi. The matter travelled to the Court of Collector and the Commissioner and in the proceedings held it was found that respondent No.7 has obtained the qualification required for appointment to the post from the Bharatiya Shiksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh and the qualification acquired from this Parishad is not recognized by the Madhya Pradesh Board of Secondary Education and therefore, ...
Ramkrishna Dixit Vs. the State of M.P. Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2014
1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SB: HON. SHRI N.K.GUPTA,J.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.1391/1998 Ramkrishna Dixit. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri K.K.Gautam, Advocate for the applicant. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/ State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on 7th day of January, 2014) Vide judgment dated 19.12.1996 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panna in Criminal Case No.447/1987 the applicant was convicted for the offence under Sections 420, 467 and 468 of IPC and sentenced with one year's RI with fine of Rs.1000/-, two years' RI with fine of Rs.2000/- and one year's RI with fine of Rs.2000/-. In Criminal Appeal No.75/1996 the learned Sessions Judge, Panna vide judgment dated 9.11.1998 maintained the conviction of the applicant, but sentence was reduced for the offence unde...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »