Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: madhya pradesh Page 6 of about 31,311 results (0.187 seconds)

May 15 2015 (HC)

Rajeev Kumar Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and Others

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Sheel Nagu, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by a Civil Contractor belonging to category Class-I allegedly possessing wide exercise in the field of widening and construction of roads, seeking quashment of Annexures P/1 and P/2 by which fenders are invited for widening and construction of roads under 11 different civil contract packages nomenclatured as "H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R". All these packages comprise of work of three different stretch of roads. The concern of the petitioner is with civil contract packages comprising of the following roads:-- 1. Mohanpur Behat Mau (MDR-01-01) and Behat Mau (MDR-02-03), Length 51.651 Kms.; 2. Murar Chitora (MDR-01-08), Murar Chitora (MDR-02-08) and Gatha Amayan (MDR-02-06), Length 45.810 Kmsk; 3. Mohana Pohri (MDR-07-06), Length 62.360 Kms. 2. Thus, for a person bidding, it is necessary to bid for each civil contract package comprising of three different stretches of roads. In other words, the tend...

Tag this Judgment!

May 15 2015 (HC)

Hari Singh @ Sarda Pradesh and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

1. The appellant has preferred the present appeal against the judgment dated 9.3.1998 passed by the Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Special Case No.63/97, whereby each of the appellant has been convicted of offence under Sections 376(2) and 506-II of the IPC and sentenced to ten years R.I. with fine of Rs.2,000/- and one year R.I. with fine of Rs.500/-. In lieu of payment of fine, the default sentence was also imposed. 2. Facts of the case in short are that in the midnight of 11th and 12th January, 1997, the prosecutrix (PW-1) was sleeping in her hut situated in the field of her husband at village Tumra (Police Station Chargawan, District Jabalpur). At about 12:00 O'clock in the night, the appellants entered in the hut of the prosecutrix. Initially, the appellant Kok Singh removed her clothes and committed rape upon her. Thereafter, the appellants Chunna @ Jhalkan Singh and Hari Singh @ Sarda Pradesh had also committed rape upon the prosecutrix one by one. T...

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 2015 (HC)

Dharmendra Singh Tiwari Vs. Dr. Rajendra Kumar Singh and Others

Court : Madhya Pradesh

1. This order shall govern disposal of I.A. No. 20/2014 and I.A. No. 21/2014. 2. I.A. No. 20/2014: This application has been filed by respondent No. 1 under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as CPC ) read with Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereafter referred to as the R.P.Act ), inter-alia on the ground that the petitioner has called in question, the election of respondent No.1 from Assembly Constituency No. 66 Amarpatan, on the ground of suppression of material facts while submitting the nomination paper, indulging in corrupt practices and exceeding the limit of expenditure. It is further submitted that the pleadings contained in Election Petition do not disclose any cause of action because there is no specific pleading in regard to fact that how election of respondent No.1 has been materially affected. It is further submitted that there is no specific pleading in regard to corrupt practices and exceeding the limit of...

Tag this Judgment!

May 08 2015 (HC)

Hariom Singh and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

1. By invoking the supervisory powers of this Court under Sections 397/401 of Cr.P.C., the petitioners have preferred this criminal revision against the impugned order dated 8.10.2013 passed in Sessions Trial No.249/2013, whereby charges under Sections 294, 307 and 307/34 of IPC have been framed against the petitioners. 2. The prosecution story, in short, is that complainant Sundar Singh has lodged a report that a dispute is going on for the last 2-3 months between him and the petitioners as they had installed a submersible pump in the Government hand-pump and the complainant got it removed. On 11.3.2013 at about 7.20 pm when the complainant was in the house alongwith his family, the petitioners, his neighbours, by taking his name were abusing him. As soon as the complainant alongwith his son Ajay Pratap came out from the house, petitioner Amar Singh with intention to kill the complainant fired from his 12 bore gun which hit on the rim of tractor and from that something hit at the ches...

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2015 (HC)

Anuj Associates Vs. National Mineral Development Corporation Limited a ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and respondents No.1 and 2. Respondent No.3 is absent, though served. 2. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has questioned the tender process which has already culminated with the issuance of work order in favour of respondent No.3. The tender document of the petitioner has not been accepted. 3. The principal ground urged in this petition is that the tender document submitted by the respondent no.3 was not accompanied by proof of requisite experience and P.F. Code as per Clause 4(b) at item No.11 of NIT. In other words, the tender document submitted by the respondent No.3 was incomplete as it did not contain the mandatory documents to establish the eligibility of the respondent No.3 to participate in the tender process, to wit, experience certificate and P.F. Code. Those documents were mandatory as can be discerned from Clause 4 of the notice inviting tender dated 15.09.2012 and conjointly read with ...

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2015 (HC)

M.P. Veneer and Plywood Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and Another

Court : Madhya Pradesh

1. In this appeal preferred under section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act (hereinafter referred to as `Act'), 1996, the appellant has assailed the validity of the order dated 20-8-2010 passed by the trial Court by which objection preferred by the appellant under section 34 of the Act has been dismissed as barred by limitation. In order to appreciate the appellant's challenge to the impugned order few facts need mention which are stated infra. 2. The appellant had established its veneering unit at Betul in pursuance to the assurance given by the State Government and an agreement was executed between the parties on 28-11-1978. Under the agreement, teak and timber was to be supplied to the appellant for a period of 12 years from 14 depots which were specified in the agreement. The respondents failed to adhere to its commitment spelt in the agreement. The dispute between the parties arose on account of demand notice issued by the respondent on 26-3-1988 and 5-4-1988. The appellant a...

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2015 (HC)

Santosh Sahare Vs. State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Sushil Kumar Gupta, J. 1. This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. 2. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.257/14 registered at P.S. Badarwas, District Shivpuri, for the offence punishable under Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (In short Act of 1955). 3. As per prosecution case, complainant Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Senior Agriculture Development Officer, Block Badarwas has lodged the report at Police Station Badarwas that sample of Vantolite Sulphur 90% Batch No. BNS 011 taken on 25.01.2014, which was supplied by Aviral Bio-Tech and Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd., Mandideep, Raisen and same was sent for examination at Quality Control Laboratory, Bhopal, was found sub-standard. On this report, police has registered offence under section 3/7 of Act of 1955 against the applicant who is the Manager of quality control. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has ...

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2015 (HC)

Prabha Exim Pvt. Ltd., Thru. Kshitij Garg Vs. Public Words Department

Court : Madhya Pradesh

1. Heard on the question of admission. 2. The petitioner is a Class-B Civil Government Contractor. It is alleged that after lapse of months respondents have not finalised the final bill of the petitioner for want of Royalty Clearance Certificate as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the petitioner and Department. 3. According to the petitioner, in view of the law laid down by this Court as well as at Principal Seat, Jabalpur in various cases, including the cases of M.P. Contractors Sangh, Indore and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Ors., 1987 JLJ 743,M.P. Audhyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam v. Abrar Construction Company and Ors., 2005 Arb. WLJ 379 (MP), Keti Construction Ltd. v. State of M.P. 2007 (3) M.P.H.T. 433 (D.B.) and Tomar Construction Company v. State of M.P. and Ors. 2008 (2) M.P.L.J 40 and recently in Writ Appeal No. 357/2012 (M/s. Arpit Heights (P) Ltd. v. Indore Development Authority) decided on 18.03.2013, the insistence of the respondents for production of the ...

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2015 (HC)

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Prem Bai and Others

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Heard on admission. The appellant-Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal against the award dated 6.11.2009 passed by the Third MACT, Jabalpur in Claim Case No.8/2008 whereby the compensation of Rs.1 lakh along with interest was granted to the respondent No.1 by ignoring the objection raised by the Insurance Company that the vehicle was goods vehicle and the deceased was a passenger in the goods vehicle. The brief facts of the case are that the deceased Jairam was working in a tent house as a Manager and worker. On 8.4.2007 he was taking luggage of the tent house in a vehicle bearing registration No.MKE/T/J-0880 and due to accident Jairam fell down from the vehicle and died. The respondent No.1 preferred a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunals after framing of the issues and recording of the evidence of the parties found that no violation of the policy condition was done by the driver or insured person, and therefore the Insurance Compa...

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2015 (HC)

Jitendra Agnihotri Vs. Madhumita Dutta

Court : Madhya Pradesh

1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, here-in-after referred to the Code , has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by order dated 24.03.2014, passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Anuppur in Criminal Revision No.04/2014, arising out of order dated 24.01.2014 passed by the Court of Gram Nyayalaya, Anuppur in M.Cr.C. No.187/2010, whereby the Sessions Court maintained the awarded interim maintenance amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondent/wife. 2. The respondent filed an application under Section 12, 20, 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2005, here-inafter in short Do. Vio. Act , against the applicant before learned Gram Nyayalaya, Anuppur for claiming maintenance. It was alleged in main application that marriage between the parties was performed on 23.04.2006 at Virasani Devi Mandir, Birsinghpur Pali and they resided together as husband-wife till April 2009 and after that the applicant left the respondent ...

Tag this Judgment!


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