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.
Vijay Kumar Vs. Smt. Hemlata Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
C.R.No.507/2013. 1 (Vijay Kumar versus Smt. Hemlata & otheRs.14/02/2014. Shri Imtiaz Husain, learned counsel for petitioner. This revision under Section 388(3) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 has been filed challenging the orders passed by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court in the matter of rejecting a application for grant of Succession Certificate in a proceeding held under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. Applicant is the son of late Smt. Shanta Bai and in the name of Smt. Shanta Bai saw mill was functioning in District Betul based on the licence and permission granted by the Forest Department. It is seen that after death of Smt. Shanta Bai on the ground that the licencee has died, licence was cancelled and thereafter petitioner made efforts for renewal of the licence and its transfer and registration in his name. As the saw mill and equipments lying therein was in the name of Smt. Shanta Bai, a died person, the Forest Department insisted upon the petitioner t...
Vijay Kumar Malhotra Vs. M.P.Grih Nirman Mandal Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
W.P.No.785/2009 14/02/2014: Shri Ashok Banke, learned counsel for the petitioner. Challenging the action of the respondent M.P.Housing Board in increasing the rent of the premises in question by 50%, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. Perusal of the record indicates that the petitioner was alloted a shop by the M.P.Housing Board and the impugned action has been taken sometime on 17.6.2008. Challenging the impugned action this writ petition was filed on 20 th January, 2009. It was listed for admission on 6.2.2009 and 13.2.2009 and on both the occasions when queries were made by this Court the case was adjourned at the instance of the petitioner for clarification or filing document. The matter is now listed after more than 5 yeaRs.Learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to an order dated 1.8.2005 passed in W.P.No.4992/2004 (Mahendra Bharbava versus M.P.Grih Nirman Mandal and otheRs.wherein it is said that under the similar situation when enhancement of the amoun...
Rahul Pardeshi Vs. Smt.Anita Pardeshi Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
- 1 -1 C.R.No.243/2008 14/2/2014 : Smt. Nirmala Nayak, learned Govt. Advocate, for the applicant State. Challenging an award passed by the M.P.State Arbitration Tribunal in Arbitration Case No.80/2002 on 8.6.2007 making an award of Rs.4,41,898/- along with interest Rs.2,05,550/- total Rs.6,45,848/- this revision petition has been filed under Section 19 of the M.P.Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhniyam, 1983. As there is a delay of 267 days in filing of the revision, I.A.No.6792/2008 has been filed seeking condonation of delay. The award was passed on 8.6.2007 and the revision petition was presented before this Court on 16.6.2008. Delay of 267 days is explained by contending that after the award was passed on 8.6.2007, matter was referred to the Law Department and permission was granted by the Law Department vide Memo Document No.A on 22.2.2008 and thereafter, officer-in-charge was appointed vide order dated 21.4.2008 Document No.B and the revision petition was filed on 6.6.2008. Except for say...
Mushtak Khan Vs. Chief Engineer Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justi ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
Writ Petition No.9312/2009. 14.2.2014. Shri Anoop Shrivastava,, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri Sudesh Verma, learned Government Advocate for the respondents on advance notice. Heard on admission. Order-dated 26.9.2006 passed by Industrial Court in Appeal No.371/03/MPIR is being assailed vide this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner while employed on daily wages with the respondent-Establishment : Water Resources Department since 1.10.1980 filed an application before Labour Court under Section 31 read with Section 61 of M.P.Industrial Relations Act, 1961 for permanent classification on the post of Mate on the plea that his initial appointment was against vacant post and after following due process of law. The contentions were denied by the employer. It was stated that the workman was engaged on muster roll as labour and was not appointed against any post. The Labour Court by drawing an adveRs.inference as the employer failed to produce the relevant ...
Sukum Chand Gupta Vs. Sudama Prasad @Siddhu @Suresh Kumar Judgement Gi ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
Civil Revision No.206/2013. 14.2.2014. Shri A.K.Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri T.C.Lakhera, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. Order-dated 6.4.2010 passed by Second Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, rejecting petitioners application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in Civil Suit No.7-A/2007, is being assailed vide this civil revision. Suit by the respondent no.1/plantiff is for declaration that relinquishment deed dated 17.3.2004 in respect of suit land executed by defendant no.1 in favour of defendant no.2, the petitioner herein, be declared as null and void, on the plaint contention that the suit property was jointly purchased by the plaintiff and defendant no.1 vide registered sale deed dated 22.1.1958 and since then, the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property. Defendant no.2, present petitioner, on being summoned raised a preliminary objection by...
Ramesh Pahadiya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
Cr.A.No.688/2010 Dharmendra Kumar versus Summer Singh Bhadoriya 14/02/2014 Shri Ghanshyam Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Alok Tapikar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Keeping in view the reasons indicated in the application for condonation of delay (I.A.No.25444/2013) and finding the same to be bonafide, the application is allowed. The delay in filing the criminal revision is condoned. The revision is admitted for hearing. Call for the records from the court below. List for hearing along with the records. Heard learned counsel for the parties on I.A.No.2341/2014. Appellant has been convicted for offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced to undergo one year R.I.& compensation of ` One Lac with a fine amount of `10,000/-. The fine amount of `10,000/- has been deposited. It is pointed out that the appellant has already implicated in another case, wherein, a compensation of `2,00,000/- was awarded and on the applicant's depositing...
M.P.Road Transport Corporation Vs. Rampal Singh Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
:: 1 :: Writ Petition No.1825/2009. 14.2.2014. Shri P.K.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on admission. This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order-dated 10.9.2007 passed by Labour Court, Sidhi and order-dated 18.12.2008 passed by State Industrial Court, Rewa. Respondent no.1 was employed as Conductor with the petitioner-Corporation and at relevant time, was posted at Depot Sidhi. That, while on duty, on 29.8.2001, on the Banaras route, the respondent no.1 was apprehended carrying three passengers without ticket wherefore he was subjected to domestic enquiry whereon having found guilty of the charges, was dispensed with from service on 4.4.2002. On a challenge under Sections 31(3).61 and 62 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960, the Labour Court initially, by order-dated 10.10.2006, found the domestic enquiry vitiated; thereafter, on a finding that the employer did not lead any evidence to prove the miscond...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Bhagwan Singh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
M.Cr.C.No.4504/2013 M.Cr.C.No.4504/2013 13.2.2014 Shri R.N.Yadav, Panel Lawyer for the State/ appellant. Heard on admission. The State has preferred the present application for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 18.1.2013 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen in S.T.No.153/ 2012, whereby the respondent was acquitted from the charges of offence punishable under Sections 285, 435 of IPC. The prosecution's case, in short, is that, on 15.4.2011, at about 10 a.m.in the morning, the respondent set the remains of his crops on fire and thereafter, he did not take care of that fire and therefore, the fire reached in the field of the complainant Preetam Singh (P.W.1) and therefore, two plants of lemon and 2 trees of eucalyptus were burnt. Also, ten quintals of fodder of the complainant was burnt. Preetam Singh has lodged an FIR, Ex.P/1 at Police Station Salamatpur, District Raisen and after due investigation, a charge-sheet was filed. After considering t...
Anant Ghate Vs. Dilip Deshpande Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justi ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
W.P.No.20969/2013 (Anant Ghate versus Dilip Deshpande) 13.02.2014 Heard Shri Jaideep Shirpurkar, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 22.11.2013 by which the court below i.e.the Second Additional District Judge, Chhindwara has refused to initiate the contempt proceedings against the respondent. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the proceedings under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act between the petitioner and the daughter of the respondent are pending. It is submitted that during the couRs.of the evidence of the respondent's daughter which was being recorded by the court below on 03.09.2012, the respondent started shouting and abusing the petitioner on account of which the statement of the respondent's daughter could not be recoded and the proceedings were adjourned. It is submitted that in view of the aforesaid the petitioner filed an application for initia...
Smt. Varsha Singh Tomar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Give ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
M.Cr.C. No.2050 of 2014 Smt. Varsha Singh Tomar & anr Vs. State of M.P. 13.02.2014 Shri Akshay Namdeo, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri Prakash Gupta, learned PL for respondent-State.1. On behalf of the applicants, Smt. Versha Singh Tomar and Jitendra Singh Rajput this petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail as they are under apprehension of their arrest in connection of Crime No.20/13, registered at Police Station S.T.F., Bhopal for the offence of Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, Section 65, 66 of I.T. Act and Section 3-D-1, 2/4 of M.P. Grant Examination Act 1937.2. The applicants' counsel after taking me through the rejection order of the Sessions Court and the papers placed on record argued that the applicants or any of them has not committed the alleged offence by practicing fraud with the authority and the system or by involving themselves under the criminal conspiracy with the co-accused in fabricating the forged valuable doc...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »