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.
Santosh Nageshwar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
M.Cr.C.No.1828/2014 12/02/2014 Shri Ghanshyam Pandey, Advocate for the applicant. Smt. Shobhna Sharma, PL for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.16/14, registered at police station Paraswada, District Balaghat for the offence punishable under section 2 of Rashtriya Gourav Apman Niwaran Adhiniyam. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation against this applicant is that he failed to fold down the National Flag hoisted on 26/01/2014 in scheduled time and thereby he committed the offence under section 2 of Rashtriya Gourav Apman Niwaran Adhiniyam. Applicant is ready to co-operate in further investigation. Nothing is required to be seized from his possession. Applicant is a govt. servant and in the event of arrest his reputation as well as care...
C.L. Deharwal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
M.Cr.C.No.1971/2014 12/02/2014 Shri Paritosh Trivedi, Advocate for the applicant. Smt. Shobhna Sharma, PL for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.92/13, registered at police station Birsa, District Balaghat for the offence punishable under sections 119, 167, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Smt. Seema Markam, Sarpanch and Shivcharan, SDO have already been released on anticipatory bail by this Court and case of this applicant is just similar to them. The matter is arose out of the private complaint wherein an application u/s 156 (3) of Cr.P.C has been filed by the complainant on the direction of Court and police has registered a case under the alleged offe...
Lala Rathore Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'b ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
Writ Petition No.2324/2006 12.02.2014 None for the petitioner. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondents. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner calling in question the order dated 26.4.2005 by which the Additional Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur dismissed the revision of the petitioner against the order of Collector dated 20.7.2004 on the ground of limitation. The revision was filed under Section 50 of the Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').The limitation for filing of an appeal or revision is prescribed under Section 47 of the Code and there is a provision of extension of time for filing of the revision. However, in stead of deciding the revision on merits, the same was dismissed only on the technical ground of limitation. It is seen that the revision was filed against an order of Collector by which appeal of the petitioner against the order of the revenue authority was dismissed only on the ground of limitation. The revenu...
Sushri Saloni Vs. Chief Secretary Judgement Given By: Hon'ble the Chie ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
W.P.No.21553/2013, W.P.2232/2014, W.P.No.21251/2013, W.P.No.15404/2013 and W.P.No.21318/2013 W.P.No.21553/2013, W.P.2232/2014, W.P.No.21251/2013, W.P.No.15404/2013 and W.P.No.21318/2013 12.02.2014 Shri Parag Chaturvedi, amicus curiae for the petitioners in W.P.No.21553/2013. Petitioners in other writ petitions are also represented by their respective counsel. Shri V. Giri, Senior Advocate with Shri Purushaindra Kaurav, Additional Advocate General, Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, Government Advocate and Shri Mohammed Sadique T.A., Advocate for the respondents/State. We have heard learned amicus curiae in W.P.No.21553/2013. We wanted to ascertain how the relief claimed in the petition originally filed on 2nd September, 2013 to refer the investigation to CBI is still relevant. We had that doubt because it is noticed from the record that the State Government realising the seriousness of the allegation and the situation deemed it appropriate to constitute Special Task Force (STF).an independent inve...
Balram Vs. Murar Singh Nayak Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
- 1 -1 M.A.No.4149/2011 12/2/2014 : Shri Kapil Patwardhan, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri K.K.Singh, learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company. This is an appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Betul. It is an admitted position that Motorcycle bearing No.MP48MC-1472 was owned by respondent No.1 Murar Singh and on the date of the incident i.e.14.1.2011 it was being driven by respondent No.2 Dashrath and it is also an admitted position that the said motorcycle is insured with the United India Insurance Company. It is said that on the date the aforesaid motorcycle driven by respondent No.2 dashed against the applicant at about 11 in the afternoon while the applicant was passing through a road in Village Dhana. Because of the accident it is said that the applicant suffered various injuries on his leg and other parts of the bo...
The Commissioner Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Khurai Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
The Commissioner versus Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Khurai I.T.A.No.114 / 2012 12.2.2014. Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the appellant. This is Revenue's Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore on 3.2.2012 in the matter of allowing an expenditure to the respondent to the tune of Rs.8,21,017/-. Respondent Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti is a statutory establishment created under the M.P.Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam and functions under the statutory rules and regulations framed for the assessment year 2006-2007. The assessee submitted its return and claimed exemption from payment of tax, an amount of Rs.4,45,465/- said to have been paid towards pension funds of the employees and Rs.3,75,552/- towards pension and gratuity, total amounting to Rs.8,21,017/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed these expenditure merely on the ground that along with return prepared, documents with regard to these expenditure are not av...
Shivlal Borikar Vs. Shri Atul Shrivastava Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
- 1 -1 Conc. No.972/2011 12/2/2014 : Shri Ravindra Bisen, learned counsel for the applicant. Complaining disobedience of an order passed by this Court on 16.4.2010 in W.P.No.3314/2009 this application has been filed for initiating action for contempt. On notice being issued, respondents have filed reply and from the reply filed by the respondents it is seen that after evaluating the claim of the petitioner at the level of the Divisional Forest Officer and Chief Conservator of Forest, Balaghat, vide Annexure R/1 and R/2, the matter has been forwarded to the State Government and is pending before the Forest Department. It is said that now the State Government is to take action in the matter and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and Forest Department is to consider and decide the claim based on the communication made by the local office vide Annexure R/1 and R/2. Records indicate that the matter is pending with the State Government since 7.12.2011. However, in these proceedings th...
Rajendra Rai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'b ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
- 1 -1 M.Cr.C.No.1940/2014 12/2/2014 : Shri M.K.Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Alok Tapekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Challenging the orders dated 7.5.2013 passed by the Trial Court and the order dated 19th December 2013 passed by the Revisional Court in the matter of permitting the petitioner to examine a defence witness namely one Dr.S.K. Sharma who was working in the Government Hospital at Katni, this application has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.Petitioner is facing trial in Crime No.128/2007 for offences under Section 456, 323, 294, 506 and 354 of the IPC and petitioner wanted to examine various defence witnesses in support of his defence. One of the witness to be examined was Dr.S.K. Sharma working in the Government Hospital at Katni. Even though the learned Court granted time to the applicant to keep the witnesses present on various dates but ultimately when the witness was present and for more than two hours was available in the Court, b...
Rajesh JaIn Vs. Smt. Bina Aasati Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Just ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
W.P.No.7201/2012 Rajesh Jain & ORS.versus Smt. Bina Asati & ORS.12/02/2014 Shri P.C.Paliwal, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Umesh Trivedi, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Challenging the interlocutory order dated 23.4.2012 passed by the learned 5 th Civil Judge Class-II Balaghat in Civil Suit No.18-A/2010 disallowing an application filed by the plaintiff/petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, this writ petition has been filed. Petitioner is a plaintiff and has filed the suit in question for declaration and injunction with regard to the suit property, as is detailed in Paragraph-5.2 of the writ petition. After the suit was filed and at the stage of framing all issues, the petitioner/plaintiff filed an application for amendment and made a plea for restoration of possession and also made an complaint with regard to demolition of certain portion by the respondents and interference with the possession in the matter. The said application has been rejected only on the grou...
Smt. Shanti Bavaria Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
W.P.No.448/2007 Smt. Shanti Bavaria Vs. State of MP & Ors. 12/02/2014 None appears for the petitioner. Smt. Nirmala Nayak, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State. This petition is pending since 2007 and till date even though notices have been issued, no reply is filed by the respondents. Keeping in view the short controversy involved in the matter, the case is being heard and disposed of by this order.2. Petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer vide order dated 23.12.1974 in the Education Department and finally, he was selected and appointed as a Principal, Higher Secondary School after due process of selection conducted by the Public Service Commission on 27.3.1987. He joined the duties as Principal on 27.3.1987. It seems that in the year 1997, while the petitioner was working as a Secretary in the Examination Section of the Education Department at Jabalpur, due to certain irregularity in the conduct of the examination based on the report submitted by the Commissioner, Ja...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »