Madhya Pradesh Court August 1957 Judgments
Gourishankar Baldeoprasad Vs. Dulichand Yadav and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP277
ORDER1. This is plaintiffs appeal from the judgment and decree of the Court of 1st Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, dismissing his suit No. 20-A of 1951.2. The plaintiff had filed an application early in 1951 for permission to sue in forma pauperis. That application was dismissed on 19-6-1951 and the plaintiff was directed to bear his own costs and to pay the costs of the present defendants who were the non-applicants in those proceedings. The present suit was thereafter filed in the ordinary manner on 27-12-1951 without payment of the costs of the previous proceedings.The amount payable to defendant No. 1 was offered in Court by the plaintiff on 30-4-1952 but was refused. The costs were then deposited in Court on 14-8-1952. So far as defendant No. 2 is concerned, his costs amounted to Re. 1/-, but he made 110 objection to the institution of the suit on any allegation of non-payment. The lower Court dismissed the suit holding that as the plaintiff had not paid to defendant No. 1 hi...
Tag this Judgment!Ramrao Krishnarao Vs. Shivgovind Pranprasad and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP41
Dixit, J. 1. This is a reference made to us by a single Judge in a second appeal arising out of a suit, for ejectment of the respondents from certain. Inam lands situated in Indore. The question referred to us for opinion is in substance whether the heirs of a deceased tenant of Inam, lands, whose tenancy came to an end by efflux of the time limited thereby, are tenants or ordinary tenants for the purposes of Sections 3 and 4 of the Madhya Bharat Muafi and Inam Tenants and Sub-tenants Protection Act, 1954.2. The question arises thus. The appellant instituted a suit against Shivgovind for ejectment from Inam lands in suit, arrears of rent and mesne profits on the allegation that the lands in question belonging to him were first leased out to the defendant for Fasli year 1357; that they were again leased out to him for the Fasli year 1358; that the defendant remained in arrears of rent and that thereupon he gave a notice to the defendant on 29th May 1949, to vacate the land at the end of...
Tag this Judgment!V.P. Desa Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP297
1. This first appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed in civil suit No. 22B of 1948 by the Additional District Judge Jabalpur dismissing the claim of the plaintiff-appellant, V.P. Desa.2. The plaintiff's case was that he had booked his motor car on 12-9-1947 at Quetta with the North Western Railway to be carried to Jabalpur and that the car was lost in transit. He claimed a sum of Rs. 6,000 as its value from the Union of India, defendant No. 1, as representing the Railways. The car was insured with the National Fire and General Insurance Co., Ltd., Calcutta, defendant No. 2, and hence the Insurance Co., was also sought to be made liable for the claim. The plaintiff stated that he could maintain the suit at Jabalpur as he was displaced person within the meaning of the Displaced Persons (Institution of Suits) Act, 1948.3. The Union of India stated that the North Western Railway with which the consignment was stated to have been booked, was in the Dominion of Pakistan...
Tag this Judgment!Shrigopal Rameshwardas Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1957
Reported in: [1958]9STC16(MP)
ORDER1. This is a reference under Section 23(1) of the M. P. Sales Tax Act by the Board of Revenue referring the following question for the opinion of this Court:Under the facts and circumstances of the case, could the despatches of oilseeds of the value of Rs. 2,64,386 made by the applicant to places outside the Province during the assessment period 13th November, 1947, to 31st October, 1948, constitute 'sale' taxable under the Sales Tax Act ?The assessment period is before the commencement of the present Constitution and is governed by the Government of India Act, 1935. The question involves the application of Explanation (II) to Section 2(g) of the Sales Tax Act, 1947. The facts of the case are as follows.2. The assessee employs pucca adatiyas including Ramdas Manohardas, Khadakpore, for the purpose of arranging sales of linseed and other oilseeds and food-grains which he despatches from Jabalpur to Khadakpore and other places outside the State. During the assessment year he sent va...
Tag this Judgment!Premchand Lalchand Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP68
1. This appeal is against an order made by V.R. Sen, J., on the 26th November 1954 dismissing Miscellaneous Petition No. 317 of 1954. By that petition the petitioner Premchand asked the High Court to quash an order dated the 22nd December 1953, passed by the Additional Custodian of Evacuee Property, Madhya Pradesh, and confirmed on appeal by the Deputy Custodian of Evacuee Property, Jabalpur, on 15th January 1953. It is admitted that the order of the Deputy Custodian was taken up in revision by the petitioner before the Custodian-General, New Delhi, and that the revision application failed. The order of the Custodian-General has not been exhibited in these proceedings.2. On the authority of a decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Election Commission v. Venkata Rao, 1953 SCR 1144: (AIR 1953 SC 210) (A), affirmed later by their Lordships in Rashid and Son v. Income-tax Investigation Commission, AIR 1954 SC 207 (B), the learned single Judge declined to quash the orders of th...
Tag this Judgment!Nathulal and ors. Vs. Ratansi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP218
ORDER1. This case comes before the Full Bench on a reference by Choudhuri J. The appeal arises out of a civil suit filed after notice with the permission of the Rent Controller, and the dispute is as to the validity of the notice which has been served upon the tenant. Admittedly, the tenant was asked to be evicted from only a portion of the house, and the contention of the tenant is that the notice served on him, was invalid and further that if the notice were held to flow from the C. P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949, the C. P. and Berar Regulation of Letting of Accommodation Act, 1946, and the House Rent Control Order are ultra vires in material particulars. 2. The case was sent to this Full Bench for final decision, but we think it better that we should express ourselves only on the questions of Law which have been raised before us and leave the matter to the learned Single Judge. Fortunately the referring Judge is with us and he agrees that this is the bes...
Tag this Judgment!Suganchand Kanhaiyalal Rathi Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP275; [1958]34ITR152(MP)
ORDER1. This is a reference under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, referring a question of law for the determination of this Court. The question of law suggested by the Tribunal is as follows:'Whether it was open to the assessee in an appeal against the quantum of assessment made under Section 23 (4) of the Indian Income-tax Act to prove that the assessee did not maintain any books of account for the Ganganagar business and then on proof of that ask the Tribunal to treat the appeal as an appeal against an assessment made under Section 23 (3)?'2. The facts of the case are as follows : The assessee, Suganchand Kanhaiyalal Rathi of Jabalpur, is a Hindu undivided family, and admittedly it has business at various places, including Ganganagar in the former Bikaner State. The matter relates to the assessment for the year 1948-49, and a notice under Section 22 (4) of the Indian Income-tax Act was served upon the assessee. He produce...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Committee Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP308
ORDER1. The order in this appeal shall also govern the disposal of Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 153 to 155, all of 1955. These appeals have been filed against the orders made by Bhutt J., in four miscellaneous petitions filed by the Municipal Committee, Sagar, asking that the orders of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sagar, and the Board of Revenue Madhya Pradesh, Nagpur, passed respectively on 11-12-1950 and 8-9-1954 be quashed.2. The facts of these four cases are alike, except in the matter of some dates and amounts involved. Shortly stated these facts are as follows: The third respondent in each of these Letters Patent appeals is a firm of bidi merchants, which exported within the limits of the Sagar Municipality certain quantities of tobacco.According to the rules existing in the said municipality they were required to pay octroi duty on the tobacco so imported. They, however, felt that in view of the demands of the Central Government of excise duty on the same tobacco the Munic...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Banshilal Behari
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP13; 1958CriLJ44
A.H. Khan, J.1. The accused appellant Banshilal son of Biharilal, has been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilsa (Camp Rajgarh), for the murders of Banwari, aged 22 years, and his mother, Mst. Bhanwari Bai, under Section 302, and, sentenced to death. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has sent the case to this Court under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for confirmation of the death sentence and it is registered as Criminal Case No. 2 of 1957. The accused has also filed an appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1957) against his conviction and sentence. Both the cases are being disposed of by a single judgment.2. The story sought to be proved 'by the prosecution is that Ishwar Maharaj and accused Banshilal are uncle and nephew and that they both lived in their ancestral house in village Barkheda. They also possessed ancestral land measuring about 7 1/2 Bighas. This land was partitioned between the uncle and the nephew about 25 years back. Ishwar Maharaj had no ...
Tag this Judgment!Devisahai Premraj Vs. Govindrao Balwantrao and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958MP66; 1958CriLJ383
Dixit, J. 1. This, is an application under Section 417 (3) Cr. P. C., for leave to appeal against a decision of the Additional District Magistrate, Indore, acquitting the non-applicants of charges under Sections 420, 467 and 471 I. P. O. 2. It is not necessary to refer to the facts of the case, for this petition, must be dismissed on the ground that in this case the applicant has no right of appeal at all and his application under Section 417 (3), for leave to appeal is not competent. 3. The applicant made his complaint against the non-applicants in respect of offences mentioned above in 1951. The decision of the Additional District Magistrate acquitting the non-applicants was pronounced on 19th December, 1955. The complaint was thus lodged and the case was decided before the commencement of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1955. Now, under the Criminal Procedure Code as it stood before it was amended in 1955, the State alone had the right of appeal against a decision of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »