Madhya Pradesh Court January 1957 Judgments
Mohanlal Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP133; (1957)IILLJ684MP
Bhutt, J.1. This is plaintiff's appeal from the decree dismissing his suit for declaration.2. The plaintiff was a temporary employee in the Food Department. He alleged that he was promoted in the year 1047 on a permanent basis, but the Courts below have found against him on this point. This finding was not disputed before me.3. The Plaintiffs services were terminated by the State Government by a month's notice on 15th February 1950. His case was that the action taken against him was in contravention of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India and accordingly the order terminating his services was liable to be declared illegal.4. The case of the State Government was that the plaintiff's work in the year 1948-49 was unsatisfactory and there were also indications of his dishonesty. He was, therefore, given a warning on 9th December 1949 but as his work did not come up to the mark, he was properly served with a notice terminating his service. It was also alleged that this step was taken...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Bhagwatiprasad Mishra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP159
1. This is an appeal by the defendant, Union of India against the decree of the Additional First Civil Judge, First Class, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 85-B of 1950. This judgment shall also dispose of the plaintiff's cross-objection.2. The plaintiff-respondent, Bhagwatiprasad, was employed as a delivery-man by the Government Military Farm, Jabalpur. His duty was to supply milk to the customers. The milk used to be carried In a military truck. On 22nd November 1947, the plaintiff met with an accident when he was out on his duties.The driver of the truck was Kartarsingh (D. W. 3). It is not disputed that the plaintiff had fallen down from the truck and came under its hind wheel. He was in the hospital under treatment from 22-11-1947 till 26-1-1948. The injuries resulted in (1) fracture both pubic rami left, (2) fracture medical malleolus left tibia and (3) dislocation of right sacro-illic joint.The injury, according to Dr. Bishensingh (P. W. 2), has resulted in permanent disablement of t...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal Vs. Jagmohandas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP206
ORDERSamvatsar, J.1. The opponent has filed a suit against the petitioner in the Court of Civil Judge First Class Ujjain. The Suit was resisted by the petitioner and was ultimately dismissed by the Court by its judgment dated 16-1,1-1955.2. On 1-2-1954 the learned Civil Judge realised that he had not passed an order as regards recovery of duty and penalty on Exhibit D/1, the document produced in defence by the petitioner. He therefore passed an order directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 715 for stamp duty and penalty. Aggrieved by this order the petitioner has preferred this revision-application.3. Mr, Patel contended, that on 26-11-1953 when the Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit the Court became functus officio and ceased to have any jurisdiction over the case. He submitted that the order passed by the learned Civil Judge on 1-2-1954was without jurisdiction and illegal.4. The contention of Mr. Patel is supported by the decision of Calcutta High Court in Khetra Mohan v. Jamini Kanta,...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhram Vs. Baldeodas Manilal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP138
Samvatsar, J.1. This appeal is filed by the defendant against the decree passed by the District Judge, Ujjain.2. The plaintiff firm Messrs. Baldeodas Manilal and Co., filed a suit against the defendant for recovering a sum of Rs. 13,923-15-6 in the Court of District Judge, Ujjain. The plaintiff alleged in the plaint that on 22-2-l946 the defendant borrowed from the plaintiff-firm a sum of Rs. 11,000-0-0 and promised to repay it with interest at 0-7-9 per cent per month ; that the defendant failed to pay this sum even after demand notice and the plaintiff had therefore to file the suit to recover it with interest.3. The defendant contested the claim. In his written-statement he contended :(i) that the plaintiff-firm Baldeodas Manilal and Co., was dissolved before the suit was filed and that Baldeodas, the ex-partner of the firm who alone, had brought the suit, was not competent to file it ;(ii) that the defendant firm Bulakhiram Bhagwandas was also a dissolved firm and that the defendan...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal Jitmal Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP37; [1957]8STC325(MP)
Dixit, J.1. This is a reference under Section 13 (1) of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, 1950, by the Sales Tax Commissioner. The assessee is a printer and dyer of textile cloth purchased by Mm and carries on the business of selling the printed and dyed textiles in various forms. In the assessment year 1950-51 the Sales Tax Officer levied on him a tax of Rs. 1,486-12-6 in respect of sale transactions of printed and dyed cloth sold by him. Before the Sales Tax Officer it was contended on behalf of the assessee that he was not a manufacturer; that the cloth purchased by him had been manufactured by textile mills and that on that cloth sales tax had already been levied and further that the notification issued under Section 9 of the Act did not levy any sales tax at the point of processing. This contention was rejected by the assessing authority. The assessee then preferred an appeal before the appellate Judge. This was rejected. He then took the matter in revision to the Commissioner of S...
Tag this Judgment!Noor Bux and ors. Vs. Abdul Samad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP203
Chaturvedi, J.1. This is defendants second appeal in a suit by the respondent for a permanent injunction against disturbance of an easement. The plaintiff-respondent is the owner of a house to the south of which is situate the house of the appellants. Between the two houses lies a lane ABCD as shown is the plaint map. This lane belongs to the defendant-appellants. The respondent stated that he and his predecessors-in-title had always been dropping water of the eaves of his house on this lane for the last hundred years or so as of right and as an easement.In 1948-49 the plaintiff reconstructed the upper storey of his house keeping intact the ground floor. On 9th April 1949 the defendants obstructed the plaintiff from putting tin-sheets over the root of his house. Till July 1948 when the plaintiff started the reconstruction of the upper storey of his house, the roof of his house had two slopes, one towards the south and the other towards the north. The water flowing by the southern slope...
Tag this Judgment!Dongarsingh Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP97; 1957CriLJ854
Dixit, J.1. The circumstances giving rise to this petitionunder Article 228 of the Constitution of India are that in1954 it appeared to the District Magistrate ofUjjain that an order should be made under Section 49 (2)of the Madhya Bharat Police Act externing thepetitioner from Madliya Bharat or certain portionsthereof. Accordingly, a notice was issued to thepetitioner under Section 50 (1) of the Act informing himof the general nature of the material allegationsagainst him and of the action proposed to be takenand giving him an opportunity to show cause againstthe action intended to be taken. The applicant gavehis explanation and also expressed a desire to produce certain witnesses.Before, the recording of his evidence, the petitioner moved an application under Article 228 of the Constitution in the Madhya Bharat High Court which was rejected on the ground that as no evidence had been recorded and us on that evidence no findings had been given, it could not be said that the petitioner'...
Tag this Judgment!Bansilal Agarwal and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP30; [1958]9STC100(MP)
ORDER1. This is a reference by the Commissioner of Sales-tax under Section 13 (1) of the Madhya Bharat Sales-tax Act, 1950. The assessee M/s Bansilal Agarwal and Brothers are dealers in hosiery, fancy goods, electric torch batteries etc. In connection with sale transactions of torch batteries during the period from 7th May, 1950, to 31st March, 1951, the Sales-tax Officer held the assessee liable to pay sales-tax under item No. 30 of the notification issued on 22-5-1950 under Section 5 of the Act.This item levied sales-tax at the rate of Rs. 6-4-0 per cent; on the taxable turnover of electrical goods of every description including bulbsfctyh dk gj fdle lkeku ftlesa cYc lkEehyhrgSAThe Sales-tax Officer rejected the contention of the assessee that he was entitled to deduct the amount of sales-tax recovered from the purchaser from the taxable turnover on the ground that the dealer included the amount of sales-tax in the sale price and did not recover it separately as required by Rule 51 o...
Tag this Judgment!M.A. Bashir and anr. Vs. Mrs. Ethel and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP207
Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This Letters Patent appeal is by the defendants against the judgment of Hemeon J., in Second Appeal No. 390 of 1948, dated 18th September 1953.2. The plaintiff (since deceased and represented by his legal representatives) brought the suit for the ejectment of the defendants from a house situated at Ganpatrao's Chhaoni, Civil Station, Nagpur, and for arrears of rent and mesne profits valued at Rs. 672/12/-. The plaintiff had previously obtained the permission of the Rent Controller. Accroding to the plaintiff, the defendants, who had sold the house to him on 15th March 1943, had taken it from that date on a monthly rent of Rs. 19/8/-. They paid rent till 15th October 1944 but not thereafter. The suit was thus for ejectment, rent and mesne profits.3. The defendants' plea was that the transaction was a mortgage by conditional sale and that the rent note was in lieu of interest calculated at Re. 1/8/- per cent per month on the purchase price of Rs. 1,300/-. They accord...
Tag this Judgment!Gyarsibai Vs. Mangilal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP25
ORDERSamvatsar, J. 1. This revision-petition is filed by the plaintiffs. 2. The petitioner Gyarsibai and her husband Bherulal filed a suit against the opponents 1 and 2 to recover a sum of Rs. 278-5-0 inclusive of interest in the Court of the Small Cause Judge, indore. The suit was resisted by the defendants, amongst others, on the ground that they had paid a sum of Rs. 100 to the petitioner Gyarsibai towards the claim in suit. 3. The defendants examined their witnesses first to prove their case. The plaintiffs had then to rebut the defendants' evidence and wanted to examine plaintiff No. 1 on their behalf. 4. On 10-10-1956 the plaintiff Gyarsibai applied for her examination on commission. In the application she alleged that according to the custom of her community, she does not move out and appear in public, and prayed to the Court that her statement be recorded on commission. 5. The defendants opposed this application whereupon the trial Court by its order dated 10-11-1956 rejected i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »