Madhya Pradesh Court October 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.
Pramila Divekar (since deceased) through her L.Rs. Vs. Ram Ashare Shar ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-2014
B.D Rathi, J: 1. Shri Santosh Agarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri R.K. Soni, Advocate for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Smt. Sangeeta Pachori, Govt. Advocate. for the respondent No.3/State. 2. With the consent of the counsel for the parties present, the matter is finally heard. 3. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred having been aggrieved by the order dated 28th February, 2013 passed by the Ninth Additional District Judge, Gwalior whereby Misc. Appeal numbered as 10/2013 filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) by respondents No. 1 and 2 was allowed against the petitioners and temporary injunction was granted. It may be mentioned here that in the aforesaid miscellaneous appeal, a challenge was made by the respondents No. 1 and 2 to the order dated 16/2/2013 passed by the Ninth Additional Civil Judge to the court of First Civil Judge Class-II, Gwalior in Civil Suit No.6-A/2013, rejecting the application of the respondents No. 1 and 2 preferred ...
Suresh Kumar Aarsay and Another Vs. State of M.P. and Another
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-2014
Vandana Kasrekar, J. 1. The petitioners have filed this petition for granting exemption from payment of tuition fee in the Engineering College. 2. The facts of the present case are that the petitioner No.1 has undergone the sterilization operation in the year 2000 and a green card was issued in his favour. The State Government had issued circulars from time to time thereby extending the benefit of exemption from payment of tuition fee for admission of the children of the Green Card holder in Engineering/ Medical education. A copy of that circular is filed by the petitioners as Annexure P/2. The Petitioner No.2, who is the son of petitioner No.1 took admission in respondent No.2/ University in B. Tech Computer Science courses. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners argues that as father of the petitioner no.2 i.e. petitioner No.1 being a Green Card holder issued on account of his undergoing operation of sterilization, he is therefore entitled to get exemption from payment of tuition fee. Le...
M/s. Pernod Ricard India (P) Ltd. Vs. State of MP and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-2014
1. This order disposes of a bunch of petitions registered as Writ Petitions No.274/2014, 277/2014, 278/2014, 280/2014, 275/2014, 276/2014 and 279/2014. The issue involved in these petitions is the same. 2. This bunch of petitions involves three different kinds of cases. The first being WP No.274/2014, in which FIR was not only lodged but also filed alongwith the pleadings before the Excise Commissioner for claiming the benefit of proviso to Rule 19 (2) of the M.P. Foreign Liquor Rules, 1996 (for brevity "Rules of 1996"); second category of the cases is WPs No. 277/2014, 278/2014 and 280/2014 where no FIR was produced as the same was not available and instead a certificate issued by the Police Station concerned was brought on record to claim the abovesaid benefit; and the third and last category of the cases is WPs no.275/2014, 276/2014 and 279/2014 where no offence was registered, but the factum of accident of the truck carrying the liquor having taken place was reported to the Police ...
Netlal Panche Vs. Santosh Matre
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-2014
Alok Aradhe, J: 1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 20.10.2011 passed by the Election Tribunal constituted under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by which the election petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 122 of the Act, has been dismissed. In order to appreciate the petitioners challenge to the impugned order, few facts need mention, which are stated infra. 2. The election for the post of Sarpanch for Gram Panchayat Nakshi, Janpad Panchayat Kirnapur, District Balaghat was notifi ed in the year 2010. The petitioner as well as respondent No.1 to 4 contested the election. The counting of the votes was held on 18.1.2010 and respondent No.4 was declared elected, as he had secured four more votes than the petitioner. The petitioner made an application for re-count of the votes on 18.1.2010 to the Re...
Mohammed Anwar Siddiqui Vs. Shefta Afroz
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2014
The applicant has preferred the present revision being aggrieved with the order dated 6.4.2007 passed by the learned Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal in MJC No.299/2004 whereby the maintenance of Rs. 1500/- was granted to the respondent. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the parties took place on 5.10.2000. On 9.9.2001 one male child viz. Hamja was born to the respondent. The respondent has filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the trial Court that she was being harassed for dowry demand and other reasons. After delivery of a son, she was not taken to the house of the applicant for a longer period and thereafter when she was taken again she was sent back. On her complaint a case under Section 498-A of IPC was registered against the applicant. It was submitted in the application that the applicant was a Generator Incharge in United Arab Emirate and earning approximately Rs. 30,000/- per month. The respondent sought a sum of...
Kamal Narayan Saini Vs. Rajkumar Bhavsar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-15-2014
1. Both the parties have filed the present criminal revisions against the common judgment dated 21.1.2012 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad in Criminal Appeal No.166/2010, therefore both the revisions are hereby decided by the common order. 2. The applicant of Criminal Revision No.217/2012 and the accused in the trial was convicted of offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short "N.I.Act") and 2 Cr.R. No.217/2012 and 677/2012 sentenced to six months' RI with fine of Rs.5,000/- by the JMFC Itarsi vide judgment dated 26.7.2010 in Criminal Case No.613/2004. In Criminal Appeal the conviction of the applicant-accused was maintained and sentenced was reduced to the period of three months' SI and rate of interest given on compensation @ 6% per annum. Being aggrieved with both the judgments, the applicant Kamal Narayan has filed the present criminal revision No.217/2012. 3. The applicant of Criminal Revision No.677/2012, complainant of ...
Shree Agencies Pvt.Ltd. and Another Vs. M.P.State Mining Corporation a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-15-2014
1. These applications were analogous heard on the joint request of the parties. It is agreed by learned counsel for the parties that the legal questions involved in these matters are similar. 2. The facts are taken from A.C.No. 8/2014. The petitioner, a registered company submitted bid for quarry lease, namely, the "Shivpuri Flag Stone Quarry Lease". The Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) was issued for ten years (2011-2021) for auctioning the excavation and sale of mineral flag stones from Shivpuri Khada Flag Stone Quarry Lease. In the NIT, the Corporation laid down the quantity of flag stone to be excavated yearwise from Khada quarry. The NIT is placed on record as Annexure P-1. 3. Shri V.R.Rao, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Shreyas Dharmadhikari, submits that the petitioner obtained the information under the RTI Act (Annexure P-2), which shows that the capacity of Khada quarry lease of mineral flag stone is 54000/135000 Tons. per annum, which clearly indicates that there was lim...
Abhinesh Mahore and Others Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-14-2014
1. This petition takes exception to the notification dated 18.6.2014. During pendency of this petition as final notification was issued on 28.8.2014, even the said notification is made subject matter of challenge on the same ground. 2. The principal argument of the petitioner is that after expressing intent of inclusion of villages referred to in the first notification and on receipt of the objections from the interested persons to such inclusion, the Collector himself decided the objections and submitted his proposal to the Governor. That was the basis for issuance of the impugned notification dated 28.8.2014. In other words, the argument proceeds that the Governor has not considered the said objections himself, which is the mandate flowing from Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India and in particular Section 5-A(2) of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1961'). 3. Section 5-A of the Act of 1961 was inserted as a consequence of the insertion o...
Jeevanlal Mishra Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2014
Alok Aradhe, J: 1. In this writ petition, filed pro bono publico, the petitioners, inter alia, have assailed the validity of the action of respondents in construction of the reservoir dam, namely, Pagra Dam in District Sagar. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondents to construct the dam at Village Pancham Nagar and not to shift the same to Village Pagra, i.e., at a distance of 13 kms. from Pancham Nagar. The petitioners also seek quashment of notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 as well as notice issued under Section 9, dated 6-9-2013, 4-12-2013 and 20-1-2014, respectively, under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1894 Act"). 2. Facts leading to filing of the writ petition, briefly stated, are that on the basis of survey, which was conducted and approved by the State Government, an administrative sanction for the first phase of project for construction of the dam at Village Pagra was granted by the State Gover...
Vijay Tiwari Vs. M.P. State Co-Operative Tribunal, Bhopal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-07-2014
1. Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri Pushpendra Yadav, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 on caveat. 2. Since the affected party is already represented, the matter is finally heard with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. Order dated 27-9-2014 passed by M.P. State Co-operative Tribunal, Bhopal is being assailed vide this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. Vide impugned order, a Revision preferred under section 77(14) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 1960 Act) filed by respondent No. 2-Bhopal Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. against the order dated 15-9-2014 passed by Additional Registrar (Judicial), Co-operative Societies, Bhopal has been allowed by setting aside the impugned order. 5. That, before Additional Registrar (Judicial), petitioner while invoking powers under 80-A of the 1960 Act sought quashment of order dated 23-8-2014 passed by Registering Officer appointed by the Ma...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »