Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (1.14 seconds)
Documents citing Smt. Amrita Bhatia vs Baljeet Singh Bhatia on 12 February, 2020

Vinay Kumar Saraswar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 November, 2022

2013 SCC OnLine P&H 26189 [Promil Tomar and others Vs. State of Haryana and others]; 2012 SCC OnLine Guj 6281 [Jayantram Vallabhdas Meswania Vs. Vallabhdas 9 W.P. No.2293 of 2021 Govindram Meswania]; 2017 (2) RLW 1436 (Raj.) [Rashmi Saxena (Smt.) Vs. Suresh Prakash Saxena] and also on a judgement of this Court passed in M.P. No.5217/2019 [Smt. Amrita Bhatia and others Vs. Baljeet Singh Bhatia and others]. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, in light of the law laid down by the various High Courts in the aforesaid cases, the application preferred by the petitioner should have been entertained by respondent No.2, but he failed to do so. He submits that rejecting the application on the ground of jurisdiction is illegal and frustrates the very object of the Act, 2007. He, therefore, prays that the matter may be remitted back to respondent No.2 for considering the application afresh.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 3 - S Dwivedi - Full Document

Santosh Kumar Prajapati vs Pyarelal Prajapati on 29 September, 2021

Learned counsel for Caveator appearing for respondent nos.1 & 2, on advance notice, has placed reliance on judgment passed by this Court reported in Amrita Bhatia and others vs. Baljeet Singh Bhatia and others, 2020 (2) MPLJ 516. On said judgment it was argued that exercise of right under Section 22 regarding protection of life or property of senior citizen has been conferred on District Magistrate irrespective of fact whether a person who threatens life or property of senior citizens is related to senior citizen or not. It is submitted by learned counsel for Caveator that issues raised by petitioners have been dealt with by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in aforesaid case and he prayed for time to file reply and made a prayer for rejection of interim relief to petitioners.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - V Dhagat - Full Document

Kaustubh Sharma vs Smt Suprabha Sharma on 17 August, 2022

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent relied on the Division Bench decision of this Court at Principal Seat in the case of Ganesh & Anr. Vs. Indu Bai & Anr. decided on 25.4.2022 in Writ Appeal No.214/2021 and Single Bench decision of this Court at Principal Seat in the case of Smt. Amrita Bhatia and others vs. Baljeet Singh Bhatia and others decided on 12.2.2020 in Misc. Petition No.5217/2019.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - D K Agarwal - Full Document

Smt. Archna Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 August, 2023

This aspect has been considered by the Supreme Court in a case reported in AIR online 2020 SC 897 (Smt. S.vanitha Vs. Dy.Commissioner, Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHMA KUSHWAHA Signing time: 8/11/2023 6:10:58 PM 5 Bengaluru Urban District and others) and also by the High Court in case of Smt.Amrita Bhatia and others Vs. Baljeet Singh Bhatia and others passed in M.P.No.5217/2019 and in case of Vijay Kumar Saraswar Vs. State of M.P.and others passed in W.P.No.2293/2021.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - S Dwivedi - Full Document

Jagdish Prasad Dwivedi vs Chakradhar on 4 December, 2021

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Competent Authority misunderstood the prayer and has decided the issue of maintenance. The same view is taken by the Appellate Authority and instead of granting protection to his life and property, he has dealt with the issue of maintenance. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of this court passed in W.P.No.5217/2019 dated 12.02.2020 (Smt. Amrita Bhatia and others Vs. Baljeet Singh Bhatia and others) and in M.P.No.2679/2020 dated 10.02.2021 (Ganesh and another Vs. Smt. Indue Bai and another).
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next