Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: madhya pradesh Year: 2012 Page 1 of about 216 results (0.243 seconds)

Jun 25 2012 (HC)

Smt. Premwati Kashyap Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-25-2012

..... her husband but, it was not a case of prosecution at all. it is no where claimed by the prosecution that leelawati ever went to the house of respondents for mediation purpose. it is accepted that phool chand is working as assistant grade iii in the office of deputy director, prosecution, jabalpur and he has taken the steps in a very .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2012 (HC)

Lalu @ Rajesh Vs. the State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-13-2012

..... evidence of victim jagdish it is apparent that there was no enmity between the parties. quarrel was not initiated by the victim. on the contrary, he was giving advise and mediating between the appellant and his father and therefore, the complainant has not done anything by which a right of private defence could arise to the appellant. similarly by ..... mediation between the appellant and his father, no sudden or grave provocation was caused to the appellant. it is apparent that the appellant assaulted the victim for three times. he had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 16 2012 (HC)

Smt. Vimla Pyasi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-16-2012

w.p.no.4393 o 16. 7.2012. petitioner smt. vimla pyasi along with shri harshit patel, advocate present. shri p.k.kaurav, dy.ag for the state. daughter of the petitioner namely; ms.arti has been produced by lady constable smt.sarita shukla and sub-inspector shri s.n.tiwari of police station gohalpur, jabalpur, from alpkalin avas grih, jabalpur. earlier the matter was referred for mediation. the mediator settled the matter between the parties as per the settlement recorded on 2.7.2012, which is sent to this court also. we explain the terms and conditions of the settlement to the petitioner smt. vimla pyasi and also to ms.arti, daughter of the petitioner. they have agreed and has consented to the settlement arrived by the mediator. in view of the aforesaid settlement arrived by the mediator, we record the aforesaid settlement and dispose of the matter in terms of the settlement arrived by the mediator. as per the settlement, not ms.arti shall reside with the petitioner smt. vimla pyasi. smt. vimla pyasi, present in court, has also agreed for taking custody of her daughter ms.arti. ms.arti be handed over in the custody of smt. vimla pyasi by the officers who are present in court. in view of the aforesaid, matter is finally disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived by the mediator. no order as to costs. (krishn kumar lahoti) (smt.vimla jain) judge judge khan*

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 2012 (HC)

Smt. Chaitali Bhagat Vs. Dipesh Bhagat

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-03-2012

....1 f.a.no.727 o 03. 08.2012 shri r.d.hundikar, counsel for the appellant. after hearing the arguments it appears that because of trifle matters.both the appellant and respondent are residing separately and the matter can be sorted out if it is referred for mediation. accordingly, we direct both the parties to appear before this court on 10th september,2012 so that the matter can be referred for mediation. issue notice to the respondent to cause personal appearance before this court on the next date of hearing. p.f.be paid within three working days by reregisterd ad mode. (krishn kumar lahoti) (tarun kumar kaushal) judge judge vj

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2012 (HC)

M.P.State Industrial Development Vs. M.P.Financial Corpotation and anr ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-29-2012

..... . shri v.k.shukla, counsel for respondent no.1. shri manish verma, counsel of respondent no.2. in compliance of the order dated 25.7.2012 after holding the mediation proceedings the mediator report with respect of the dispute raised in this petition is placed on the record. on asking the counsel of the parties present whether any of them have any ..... to an end or in other words the same are hereby vacated. however, considering the oral prayer of the counsel present, in view of the condition no.4 of the mediator report, the idbi main branch, indore, is hereby directed to disburs.the sum of the alleged fdr to the parties stated in condition no.1 of the ..... .no.225/05, the same is accepted and this petition is dispose of as per the terms enumerated in the aforesaid mediation report. not the parties will be governed by the terms enumerated in the aforesaid mediation report. the mediation report shall be treated to be part and parcel of this order. pursuant to it, all the interim orders which are passed ..... that the same have come to an end and not all the parties will be governed by the aforesaid mediation report. in view of the aforesaid submission, with the consent of the parties, after perusing the mediation report dated 22.8.2012 passed in mediation case no.29/12 and 30/12 with respect of the present matter as well as w.p .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2012 (HC)

Santosh Vs. the State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-18-2012

..... . the appellant santosh and accused manot were harassing a vendor of ice cream in front of the shop of the complainant sunil gupta. when the complainant sunil gupta went to mediate and stop the quarrel then, manot and santosh started abusing him. on 10.5.2002 in the 2 criminal appeal noi.2150/2003 evening, the victim informed about the incident .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 2012 (HC)

Amitabh Shukla Vs. Nath Narayan Mishra

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-03-2012

..... not say anything about misrepresentation as to pratibha s post graduation in science and none of the in- dependent witnesses viz. bhupendra tiwari and ram pratap yadav had acted as mediator to the marriage. in such a situa- tion, it was not possible to presume that the petitioner had made any misrepresentation as to educational qualification or employment status.21. to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 2012 (HC)

Devi Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-19-2012

w.a.no.600/2012 devi singh state of m.p. & others 19.6.2012 shri ghanshyam sharma, counsel for appellant. shri samdarshi tiwari, g.a., for respondents. i.a.no.7430/2012 for condonation of delay. there is delay of 96 days days in filing this appeal. learned counsel for state has no objection if the delay is condoned and the matter is heard on admission. in view of aforesaid, delay in filing this appeal is condoned. heard on admission. learned counsel for appellant submitted that the collector by invoking powers under section 50 of the m.p.land revenue code, 1959 for suo motu revision directed correction of entries in the revenue records, while the appellant's name was recorded 24 years back on the basis of settlement of land in favour of appellant. it was submitted that after 24 years of recording the name of appellant in the revenue record, the collector was having no jurisdiction to invoke such powers and the learned single judge erred in dismissing the writ petition. shri samdarshi tiwari, learned g.a., supported the order. we have perused the record and find that the appellant was recorded bhumiswami of land, survey no.109/1 area 2.25 acres, situated in village narela bajeyaft, tahsil berasiya, district bhopal. the aforesaid land was alleged to be settled in favour of appellant by the collector in case no.27/a-59/71-72 dated 23.6.1977, by changing the nature of the land. the aforesaid land was recorded in the name of appellant on 10.10.1978 by the then naib tahsildar, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 2012 (HC)

Ramgopal Thakur Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-19-2012

1 w.p. no.8193/2012 ram gopal thakur vs. state of m.p. & ors. 19.06.2012 heard shri r.k. nagar, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. the petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondent nos.1 to 5 for taking action against respondent no.6 and to issue further direction commanding the respondent nos.3 and 4 for registering a criminal case against respondent no.7 for making false and forged document for the purpose of obtaining a favourable order in favour of respondent no.7. the brief facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are that the petitioner claims to be the owner of khasra no.27, 0.440 hectare and khasra no. 278, 0.660 hectare of village mehgaon and for this purpose he had filed an application for mutation before the respondent no.6, which is still pending decision. it is stated that in the proceedings, respondent no.7 was also made a party, who entered appearance in the petitioner's case and thereafter filed a separate application seeking mutation in her name on the strength of a will. it is alleged that the respondent no.6 abused the powers vested in him and passed an order in favour of respondent no.7 directing mutation of her name without considering the application filed by the petitioner and without taking note of the fact 2 w.p. no.8193/2012 ram gopal thakur vs. state of m.p. & ors. that respondent no.7 had filed an application on the basis of a forged will. it is submitted that in view of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 2012 (HC)

Ramlakhan Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-20-2012

w.a.no.534/2012 ram lakhan patel state of m.p. and others. 20.06.2012. shri v.p.nema, counsel for the appellant. this appeal is directed against the order dated 27.4.2012 passed in w.p.no.6587/2012 by which the writ petition preferred by the appellant was dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy of filing a statutory appeal under section 44 of madhya pradesh land revenue code, 1959. the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the mutation order was passed without notice to the appellant and the aforesaid order was illegal as the appellant was co-bhumiswami of the land and his name was recorded in the revenue record. he was also entitled for the notice. we have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and find that against the order annexure p/1( in writ petition), the appellant herein had preferred a first appeal but remained unsuccessful .against such an order, a remedy of filing 2nd appeal is provided under section 44 of the madhya pradesh land revenue code, 1959.the learned single judge on the ground of availability of statutory remedy of second appeal has not entertained the petition and granted liberty to the appellant for filing a second appeal. in the impugned order, we do not find any error warranting our interference under section 2(1) of the madhya pradesh uchcha nyayalaya (khand nyaypeeth ko appeal) adhiniyam, 2005. hence this appeal is found without merit and is dismissed at admission stage. however, liberty is granted to the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //