Madhya Pradesh Court February 1957 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.
Bhagirath Prasad and anr. Vs. Badriprasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1959MP10
Bhutt, J. 1. This is defendants' appeal from the decree for money and rendition of accounts. 2. Defendants-appellants are sons of Jagmohan Singh who died on 9-7-1941. Plaintiff-respondent is his younger brother. The two brothers inherited the property of their father, Janki Prasad, who died on 13th September 1929. They continued joint till 18th May 1931 when they referred the question of partition of the joint family property for decision by Panchas. The arbitrators gave an award on 13-9-1931 with respect to the division of house property. In this partition, houses worth Rs. 67500/-were given, to Jagmohan Singh and worth Rs. 65500/- to Badri Prasad. In order to equalise the shares, the arbitrators provided as below : 'In this way, the value of share No. 1 is in excess, by Rs. 2000/-, two thousand rupees, the half share of which, that is, Rs. 1000/-, one thousand rupees, shall be paid to Badri Prasad by Thakur Jagmohan Singh from his own pocket, or Rs. 2000/-, two thousand rupees, from ...
The State Vs. Tarachand Anand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP219; 1957CriLJ1407
ORDERNevaskar, J.1. Accused Tarachand is being prosecuted for offences under Sections 406 and 420, Indian. Penal Code before the First Class Magistrate, Mhow. He applied for being exempted from personal appearance.2. This prayer was initially rejected but the High Court of Madhya Bharat in Criminal Reference No. 129 of 1951 granted exemption in the following terms:'I would therefore direct that the exemption be granted to the accused on the ground that he lives at Dehradun and it would be very expensive and inconvenient for him to attend the Court at every time and grant him exemption throughout the trial.' 3. After the case went back to the trial Court prosecution evidence was examined and the stage was reached when the examination of the accused under Section 342, Criminal P. C. was to take place. At that time it was urged on behalf of the State that the accused could not be examined through his counsel and that he ought to personally appear. The Magistrate rejected the contention in...
Union of Bharat, Ministry of Rly. Vs. Mst. Asha Bi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP79
Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This appeal is by the defendant, the Union of India, against a decree for Rs. 5,288-12-0 with costs passed by the Civil Judge, Class I, Narasimhapur.2. The facts of the case are as follows: One Mohammad Khan, an employee in the G.I.P. Railway, died on 3rd February 1944, leaving no issue. The plaintiff was his legally married wife. Mahammad Khan was a subscriber to the Provident Fund. On his death there stood a sum of Rs. 4,515-14-0 in his account. Mahammad Khan had nominated his brother Dilawar Khan to receive the amount. Dilawar Khan predeceased Mohammad Khan, leaving behind him his widow Mst. Shakuran Bi.After the death of Mohammad Khan, claims to the money were made by Mst. Shakuran Bi and Mst. Aishi Bi, the widow of subscriber. The dispute was taken to the District Court and an application for the grant of a succession certificate was made. At first Mst. Shakuran Bi succeeded. Later the decision was reversed by the District Judge, who granted the certificate to...
Chaturbhuj Vs. Naharkhan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP28; 1958CriLJ50
ORDERNevaskar, J.1. A complaint was filed by one Naharkhan son of Ghasikhan Musalman of Babrecha against the accused Chaturbhuj son of Kishanji of the same place under Section 211, I. P. C. The Magistrate examined the complainant but without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 204(1-A)and (1-B). He directed issue of process against the accused. Accused preferred revision petition in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Ratlam. The revision petition was heard by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam. According to the learned Additional Sessions Judge it was not competent for the Magistrate to issue process without complying with the mandatory provisions in Section 204 (1-A) and (1-B). He, therefore, has made this reference.2. A petition has been filed in this Court purporting to have been signed by the accused Chaturbhuj and the complainant Naharkhan stating that they had compromised the matter out of Court and that for that reason, the proceeding may be dismissed. The compla...
Bhanwarlal Vs. Gitabai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP221; 1957CriLJ1409
ORDERNevaskar, J.1. Gitabai wife of Bhanwarlal filed an application under Section 488, Criminal Procedure Code for maintenance against her husband Bhanwarlal. Bhanwarlal admitted that Gitabai was his married wife. It is also admitted that Bhanwarlal contracted a second marriage and that his wife by second marriage was residing with him. The Additional District Magistrate, Indore City, who heard the petition ordered Bhanwarlal to make a monthly allowance of Rs. 30 for the maintenance of Gitabai. A petition for revision against that order was filed in the Court of Session and the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected that revision petition. The present revision petition is directed against those orders.2. The only point pressed by learned counsel for the petitioner both in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Indore and before me is that ia view of the wordings of the proviso in Sub-section (3) of Section 488, Gitabai is not entitled to maintenance unless she agrees to stay w...
Ramkhilawan Dilrakhan Ahwashi Vs. Mullo and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP200
Chaturvedi, J.1. The plaintiff's suit for redemption of a mortgage has been dismissed by the trial Court, and this judgment has been upheld by the lower appellate Court He, therefore, comes in Second Appeal to this Court. The mortgage-deed (Ex. P-1) is dated 20th February 1022. The plaintiff is the assignee of equity of redemption from the original mortgagors and he purchased the mortgaged property by a sale-deed dated 7th April 1947 (Ex. P-2). The defendants are mortgagees. The property mortgaged under this mortgage-deed was khasra No. 198 and khasra No. 207. The latter (khasra No. 207) has come to the mortgagors hack in 1936 by some private agreement, and this is not the subject-matter of dispute.The right to redeem khasra No. 198, area 51.72 acres, is contested. The consideration For the mortgage was Rs. 5000; and it was stipulated that the profits of the property mortgaged would go towards interest. The principal amount was payable after the expiry of a period of 80 years, and it w...
Kishansingh Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP67
ORDER1. This case comes before us on a reference by one of us (Choudhuri, J.). Though the learned Judge referred two questions of law which, according to him, arose in this petition, those two questions are precisely the only questions open for decision in this case. Fortunately, Choudhuri J. is a member of this Full Bench and he agrees that on a fair interpretation of those questions the entire case is before this Full Bench.2. The facts of the case are as follows : One Rai Saheb Kisen Chand Sharma was the president of the Municipal Committee, Khurai. While he was the president, he was convicted of an offence under Section 399 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 120B ibid and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000. Against his conviction he has filed an appeal, and the appeal is pending in this Court. Meanwhile the petitioners, who number five, moved the State Government for a declaration that the office of the president had became 'vacant under...
Rochiram Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP210; 1957CriLJ1402
ORDERNevaskar, J.1. This is a reference made by the Additional District and Sessions Judge Dewas in a case under Section 12 of the Madhya Bharat Gambling Act 50 of 1949.2. Three persons Rochiram, Hafiz and Mohanlal were prosecuted before the Additional District Magistrate Dewus under Section 12 of the aforesaid Act who found them all guilty and sentenced them each to a fine of Rs. 50.3. All the three preferred a revision-petition in the Court of Sessions and the learned Additional Sessions Judge Dewas who heard the revision-petition, dismissed the same so far as the accused Hafiz and Mohanlal were concerned but allowed it in respect of the accused Rochiram.Accordingly he has made this reference.4. According to the learned Judge the learned Trying Magistrate has expressed no opinion as to how Rochiram could be convicted for the commission of the offence in question and further that there was no evidence regarding his presence on the spot.5. In the substance of evidence recorded by the M...
Sualal Mushilal Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP231; 1957CriLJ1414
ORDERNevaskar, J. 1. Petitioner Sualal stood surety for the accused Bhawanishankar in Criminal Case No. 1562 of 1951 in the Court of Additional City Magistrate, Indare. The accused remained absent on 3-7-1952. On 5-7-1952 a warrant of arrest was issued against the accused and a notice was issued to Sualal to show cause why the amount of his surety bond be not recovered from him. On 21-7-1952 the surety appeared and applied that he might be given am opportunity to secure the presence of the accused. He was given opportunity thrice but he failed to secure the presence of Bhawanishankar. The Court thereupon declared the forfeiture of the surety bond and directed, from the surety, a recovery of the amount of Rs. 400/- for which the bond had been given. Against this order the accused preferred an appeal. This was dismissed on 30th October, 1952. A revision petition filed against that order was dismissed on 23rd July 1953. Subsequently sometime in September 1953 the accused was got arrested....
D. Masanda and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP76; [1957]8STC370(MP)
Dixit, J.1. In this case stated by the Commissioner of Sales Tax under Section 13 (1) of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, 1950, the contest is as regards the liability of the Petitioner Messrs. D. Masanda and Co., to pay sales tax in respect of photographic goods and materials imported by him during the year 1952-53 and used by him in his business activities as a photographer. Under Section 3 CD (a) of the Act and the notification issued by the Government on 22nd May, 1950, in exercise of its powers under Section 5 of the Act, sales tax at the rate of Rs. 6-4-0 per cent is payable by importers of 'scientific apparatus of every kind, cameras, camera lenses and other photographic material. The relevant entry in the notification prescribing the rate of sales tax reads as follows:^^gj izdkj ds oSKkfud ;a=] dsesjk] dsesjs dsySUlsl rFkk QksVksxzkfQd vU; lkekuA**During the year 1952-1953, the assessee imported photographic material of the value of Rs. 37,559/-. Of these goods materials of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »