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.
Surajbai W/O Kaluram and ors. Vs. Sadashiv Jugal Kishore and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP100
S.M. Samvatsar, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the defendants. 2. The plaintiff-respondent Sadashiv filed a suit against the defendants Surajbai, now deceased, and her daughter Gitabai, for possession of a house situated at Gotampura and some movable property. He alleged in the plaint that he was the adopted son of one Jugalkishore who died in the year 1918 leaving behind besides himself, his widow Kasturibai; that Kasturibai and the plaintiff remained in possession of the property left by the deceased Jugalkishore; that Kasturibai died on 17-9-1947 and that the defendant No. 1 who is the daughter of one Shankarlal, the deceased brother Jugalkishore and defendant No. 2, the daughter of defendant No. 1, taking advantage of the absence of the plaintiff, took unauthorized possession of the property in suit; that on being called upon to restore it, they refused to do so. Hence the plaintiff has filed this suit. 3. The defendant No. 2 was a minor on the date of the suit and was represented b...
Mahabirprasad Durgaprasad Vs. B.S. Gupta and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP109; [1957]8STC429(MP)
Newaskar, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of writs of certiorari and prohibition against Sales Tax Officer, Indore, and the State of Madhya Bharat submitted by the petitioner Mahabirprasad Durgaprasad Tamoli, Proprietor of Mahavir Cycle Stores, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Indore. 2. The petitioner owned a shop dealing in bicycle spare parts which he imports from outside the State for the purpose of sale within the State. The Sales Tax authorities found that the petitioner owns a 'pan shop' in Mhow. The petitioner's case in the petition with respect to this pan shop is that the said shop is 'looked after' by his son Babulal who is separate from him for the last 10 years and that the entire income of the said shop which is situated at Mhow, is received by Babulal who lived and messed separately from him. The Sales Tax authorities held the petitioner liable for Sales Tax in respect of his turnover of imported bicycle spare parts for the assessment yea...
Dashrathlal Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP216; 1957CriLJ1405
ORDERNevaskar, J.1. Proceedings were started under Section 515, Criminal Procedure Code against petitioner No. 1 Dasharathlal, Petitioner No. 2 Jhabbalal stood surety for him and executed a bond for securing the presence of Dasharath during the course of the proceedings in question. On 13th June 1955 Dasha-rath failed to attend the Court. He sent a telegram intimating his inability to remain present due to his having been attacked by sun-stroke. The Court did aot take notice of this telegram and directed issue of notice both to the accused and the surety to show cause why the amount specified in their respective notices be not recovered as penalty. He heard them and directed recovery of the amount mentioned in the notices from each of them. Both of them preferred appeal to the District Magistrate, Indore. This appeal was admitted, record was sent for and notice was issued to the respondent. On one of the dates fixed for hearing viz., 7-5-1956, the appellants were absent. The appeal was...
G.V. Kale Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP240; 1957CriLJ1417
ORDERDixit, J.1. The State has instituted three separate prosecutions against the petitioner in the Court of Additional City Magistrate of Indore in respect of the offences under Section 409, I. P. C. read with Section 109 and Section 477A, I. P. C. On the conclusion of the cross-examination of certain witnesses after the framing of the charge, the prosecution made an application for being allowed to examine three new witnesses on their behalf, namely, Ganesh Shankar, Kailash Kashinath Giri and Sarangpani Engineer.The accused contended that the prosecution could not tender these new witnesses in evidence as they had not been named in the Challan and could not be regarded as 'remaining witnesses'' under Section 256, Cr. P. C. This contention was rejected by the trial Magistrate who held on the authority of certain decisions of Madras, Orissa, Bombay and Rajasthan High Courts that the words 'remaining witnesses' in Section 256, Cr. P. C., did not necessarily refer to those witnesses name...
Rajmal Vs. Phulchand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP237
ORDERSamvatsar, J.1. This is plaintiff's revision application.2. The plaintiff filed a suit to recover a sum of Rs. 235-14-0 inclusive of interest and notice charges against the defendant who was at one time plaintiff's own Munim. The suit was based on a Khata entry purporting to be in the hand-writing of the defendant himself.The suit was resisted by the defendant among other grounds, on the ground that it was barred by time. The trial Court upheld the defendant's contention and dismissed the suit, holding that it was barred by time. Aggrieved by this dismissal of his suit, the plaintiff has preferred this revision application.The only point that arises for consideration, is whether the suit is filed within time.3. Mr. R. G. Waghmare, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on Article 89 of the Limitation Act. I do not think, this Article has any application. Even if it is assumed, that the defendant was plaintiff's Munim or agent, the suit not being one for accounts, Article 89 of ...
Bharosi Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP236; 1957CriLJ1416
ORDERA.H. Khan, J.1. The Additional District Magistrate, Morena, convicted the accused under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to eight months' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal this decision way confirmed. Now the accused has filed this revision.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is a truck driver was bringing his truck on 30th November 1954 at about 2 p.m. from Morena towards Lashkar. Since the road was clear, he was driving the truck on the right hand side. From the opposite side, one Patiram was coming on a bicycle at the back of which one Swaran Singh was sitting on a carrier. . Seeing the cyclist approach from the opposite direction, the truck driver turned his truck to the left, but it seems that the cyclist turned in the same direction.There was no head-on collision, but all the same the cyclist collided against the side of the truck. As a result of this, of the two persons On the bicycle cyclist was thrown away. The person, who was ridin...
Harisingh Hiralal Dangi Vs. Ramchandra Takhat Singh Dangi and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP238
Bhutt, J.1. This is plaintiff's appeal from the decree dismissing his suit for possession.2. The property in dispute consists of 2 tenancy holding and a house situate in mauza Padrai, tahsil and district Sagar besides some moveables. It devolved on his death about 15 years back on his widow, Nai Babu, who died on 12th April, 1947. The plaintiff is the sister's son and next heir of Ramlal. The lower appeal Court has found that Nai Balm on the demise of her husband, married defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 2, Shymbai, is their minor daughter. The defendants took possession of fee property is dispute on the demise of NaiBahu. Plaintiff accordingly filed the suit, out of which this appeal arises, for possession as the heir of Ramlal. The suit was decreed by the trial Court but was dismissed in appeal as barred by limitation. Hence this appeal.3. The plea of custom raised by the defendants regarding re-marriage of widows was negatived by both the Courts below and was not pressed before me. Th...
Sm. Gulabbai Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP43
1. This opinion will also govern Miscellaneous Petition No. 162 of 1955.2. These cases come before us on a reference by Choudhuri J. The learned Single Judge has not framed the question, but in the course of his order he has clearly indicated what that question is. To quote the learned Single Judge:'The important question for consideration is whether the rules framed under Section 91 (1) of the M. P. Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950, and published under notification No. 777-XXVIII, dated 27-10-1951, by the State Government, have the force of law or do they amount to executive instructions and the orders passed thereunder are not justiciable.'3. This question has a history of its own, The rules were framed by the State Government, presumably under Section 91 (1) of the Madhya Pra-desh Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950. It is conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has not found any ...
Sardar Printing Works Vs. Sales Tax Commissioner
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP30; [1958]9STC75(MP)
ORDER1. This reference by the Commissioner of Sales Tax under Section 13 (1) of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, 1950, arises out of the matter of liability of Messrs. Sardar Printing Works to pay sales tax on the sales of printed stationery during the year 1952-53.2. The assessee carries on business in Indore as printers. That business consists in printing to the order of individual customers letterheads, bill-books,, registers etc., and other stationery of business character. The Customers did not supply the paper for the stationery required by them. They merely explained to the printer exactly the goods they desired and the printer furnished the goods at a fixed price.For the year 1952-53, the total turnover of the assessee, as shown in his returns, was Rs.24529-10-6. He claimed before the assessing authority that this taxable turnover was nil as the transactions of sales of paper were distinct and separate from the printing work done by him and the charges recovered for that work, ...
State Vs. Gulabram
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-1957
Reported in: AIR1957MP224; 1957CriLJ1410
ORDERNevaskar, J.1. The accused in this case is a cyclist peon in the engineering section of the Indore Municipality.2. The case put up against him by the Anti-Corruption Department was that he, on 28th August 1952 obtained Rs. 100/- by false representation from one Ganpat Mali, representing himself to be a Municipal Inspector. He was, therefore, put up for trial before the Special Judge, Indore under Sections 161 and 420, I. P. C. The learned Special Judge decided after full trial that the accused did not fall within the category of a public servant within the meaning of the term as used in Indian Penal Code and the Indore Municipal Act.3. He, therefore, held that the accused could not be tried and convicted for an offence under Section 161, I. P. C. He further held that inasmuch as no offence under Section 161, I. P. C. could be made out against the accused, he could not try the accused under Section 420, I. P. C., simpliciter. He, therefore, directed the complaint to be filed before...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »