Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Teerath Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
W.A.No.394/2011. (Teerath Singh versus State of Madhya Pradesh & otheRs.1 18/02/2014. Shri Rajesh Chand, learned counsel for the appellant. This writ appeal has been filed under Section 2(1) of the M.P.Uchcha Nyayalya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 challenging an order dated 08/11/2010 passed by the writ court in W.P.No.14690/2010. The respondent No.4 Smt. Mangala Kohale was working as an Assistant Grade-III in the Water Resources Department Seoni, certain action was taken against her and her services were terminated. She challenged her termination before the State Administrative Tribunal Jabalpur and thereafter matter was transferred to this Court and renumbered as W.P.No.18685/2003 and on 11/11/2003 an order was passed quashing the termination and directed for reinstatement of the respondent No.4 i.e.Smt. Mangala Kohale, she was reinstated and the state government has not taken any action against her. The petitioner, secretary of a political party represented to the depa...
Dinesh Kumar Chandre Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
....1 W.P.No.12602 of 2009 M/s Ram Awadh Yadav & anr. State of M.P.& ORS.18.02.2014 Shri N.S.Ruprah, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, Dy. A.G.for the respondents. Inspite of order dated 22.12.2009 passed in the matter, no return has been filed. In view of the aforesaid, we propose to dispose of the matter finally. Petitioner was awarded a contract for construction of Harphari Dhani Khaira Road. It appears that there was delay in execution of the work and as per the representation of the petitioner to the Department, the Chief Engineer, P.W.D., Rewa Zone, Rewa had found that there were departmental reasons for delaying the work. The Chief Engineer had directed that under clause 14 of the contract, the contract be foreclose, in place of clause 3(c) of the contract. The grievances of the petitioner is that till date the order dated 6.9.2008 has not been given effect to by the respondent No.4 and for this purpose the present petition has been filed. As no reply has been file...
M/s Vardhaman Textiles Ltd.M/s Anant Spinnning Mills Mandi Deep Di.Rai ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
....1 W.P.No.7496 of 2009 M/s Vardhaman Textiles LTD.State of M.P.& ORS.18.02.2014 Shri H.S.Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Sandesh Jain, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, Dy. A.G.for the respondents. This petition is directed against an order dated 24.2.2009 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Bhopal in case No.45/BPL/08-09 by which the matter has been remanded back to the Assessing Officer with a direction to impose five times penalty in respect of the goods which was entered into the local area before 25.12.2003 and to impose 3.5 penalty in respect of the goods which were entered after 25.12.2003. It is submitted by the petitioner that the aforesaid goods are plant, row material and machinery. Once the matter has been remanded to the Assessing Officer to ascertain the penalty, then all the questions could have been left open to be decided by the Assessing Officer including the question whether penalty should be levied or not...
Smt. Viniti Agarwal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
Smt. Viniti Agarwal versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.2821 / 2014 18.2.2014. Shri Ajeet Kumar Rawat, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the State. It is stated in the petition 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 further stated 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 and, therefore, similar treatment may be given to the petitioneRs.This Court in the case of Mohanlal (supr...
Ravi Shankar Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
Ravi Shankar Tiwari & ORS.versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.22386 / 2013 18.2.2014. Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the State. It is stated in the petition 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 further stated 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 and, therefore, similar treatment may be given to the petitioneRs.This Court in the case of Mohanla...
Kailash Choradiya Vs. Kunwarlal Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justi ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
F.A.No.863/2006 18/2/2014 Shri B.M.Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Kumaresh Pathak, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondent State. This FiRs.Appeal has been filed by the appellant in the year 2006 against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court in Civil Suit No.35A/2003 and the only grievance of the appellant is that a sum of Rs.21,700/- paid by the appellant as way of stamp duty has not been included in the decree passed for refund of cost to the appellant. Appellant is plaintiff and has filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement. It is seen that when the agreement was tendered in evidence it was found by the Trial Court that it has not been properly stamped, it is deficient in payment of stamp duty and accordingly, the document was impounded under the Stamp Act and referred to the Collector, Stamps for realization of stamp duty. After conducting the proceeding under the Stamps Act, the Collector has recovered Rs.21,700/- as stamp...
Govind Prasad Gupta Vs. Sandeep Kumar Gupta Judgement Given By: Hon'bl ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
Writ Petition No.9547/2013. 18.2.2014. Shri Manoj Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri N.P.Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no.1. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, petition is finally heard. Order-dated 27.4.2013 passed by VIIIth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No.10-A/2011 is being assailed vide this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; whereby, an application preferred by the petitioner/defendant no.1 under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for stay of suit filed by respondent no.1/plaintiff has been rejected. Suit by respondent no.1/plaintiff is for permanent injunction restraining the defendants not to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit property as well as from the shop. That, during pendency of the suit, the plaintiff was allegedly dispossessed by the defendants, which led the plaintiff to seek the decree for possession and mesne profits. The right and title over the suit property is claimed ...
M/s. Agarsen Bhawan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
Writ Petition No.1972/2014 17.02.2014 Shri A.P.Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Kaurav, learned Additional A.G.for the respondents. Looking to the short controveRs.involved in this petition with the consent of the parties the matter is heard finally. The petitioner has been assessed with new luxury tax at Rs.18 lacs. The petitioner has preferred an appeal before respondent No.4 against the order, Annexure P-1, dated 3.8.2013. The petitioner is required to deposit Rs.4,50,000/-, 1/4th of the demand under Section 46 (5) of the M.P.Vat Act. It is submitted that the petitioner is not in a position to deposit the aforesaid amount as the income derived by the petitioner is fully utilized for charitable purposes and as soon as some income is received from the building by way of rent, it is invested in charitable activities. In the aforesaid situation, the petitioner is not in a position to deposit 1/4th of amount of demand as pre deposit with the respondent no.4. On t...
Tikaram Prajapati Vs. Police Station Patan the State of Madhya Pradesh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
M.Cr.C.No.617/2014 17/02/2014 Shri Madan Singh, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Santosh Yadav, PL for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicants have been arrested on 23/12/13 in connection with Crime No.352/13 registered at P.S.Patan, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under sections 307, 498(A).342, 34 of IPC and section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. As per prosecution it is alleged against these applicants that on the date of incident they caught hold Manisha and co-accused Mahesh (husband of Manisha) poured the kerosene oil on her head thereafter, pushed her in a burning stove, as a result she caught fire and burnt. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. They are father-in-law and mother-in-law of Manisha. Applicant no.1 is 60 years old and applicant no.2 is 58 years old. It is further submitted that ...
Nirbhay JaIn Vs. Rajkishore Vyas Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Just ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
CRR No.530/2005 Criminal Revision No.530/2005 17.2.2014 Shri A.K.Soni, counsel for the applicant. None for the respondent. Learned counsel for the applicant prays for sometime to produce the applicant before this Court. After perusal of the various order-sheets, it appears that the present revision was field in the year 2005 and it was observed that the applicant absconded after disposal of the appeal though jail sentence was directed against him. His application for suspension of sentence is still pending. So many warrants etc.were issued against the applicant but, continuously a report is received from the serving officer that the applicant left Tendukheda and he is residing at Jabalpur. Learned counsel for the applicant could not produce the applicant before this Court in last 8 years and therefore, there will be no use, if some more time is given for production of the applicant. Hence, prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant is not accepted. Since, the appeal filed by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »