Madhya Pradesh Court January 1958 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.
Nirbhaydas Gangaram Vs. Smt. Gulab Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP237
ORDER1. This petition is directed against an order passed by the Election Tribunal, Hoshangabad, in Election Petition No. 334 of 1957. The order itself is in two parts having been passed in skeleton form, first on 8-8-1957 and amplified with reasons in a subsequent order delivered on 26-8-1957. The two orders in question refer to the form of the election petition and its contents.As is usual in these election petitions, certain allegations of a general character were averred. Subsequently, two applications for amendment were filed by the present petitioner asking for the incorporation of some details, which were allowed. In the opinion of the Election Tribunal the petition still remained incomplete, because details of some of the particulars were not supplied.In these two orders the Election Tribunal commanded the petitioner to furnish those details and to complete the averments in respect of some of the grounds on which the election of the first and the fourth respondents here was cha...
Markandalal and anr. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP235
ORDER1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of this Court in a laud acquisition case. It is admitted by both sides that the amount in dispute both in the Court below and on appeal to the Supreme Court is above the mark. The only question is whether the decision of the High Court can be treated as one of affirmance involving a substantial question of law.It is admitted that there is no substantial question of law as such, because the appeal involving only the valuation of the property and no substantial point of law was either mooted or decided. The learned counsel for the applicants, however, contends that the judgment cannot be treated as one of affirmance, because it varied the decree of the Court below. The variation, however, was in favour of the applicants.2. The question as to when a judgmentpartly modifying the lower Court's decision can be called a judgment of affirmance and when not, has been the subject-matter of great controve...
Asharfibai Vs. Parshadilal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP26
ORDERA.H. Khan, J.1. The plaintiff Musammat Asharfi Bai brought a suit against Ramlal, the principal debtor (defendant No. 1) and against his surety Parshadi-lal (defendant No. 2) for the recovery of the money due on a bond executed in favour of her husband. The suit was instituted after the death of the husband. During the proceedings, it was discovered that before the filing of the suit, defendant No. 1 Ramlal (principal debtor) had died, and as such his name was struck off from the array of the defendants, and, the case proceeded only against Par-shadilal, the surety.After recording evidence of the parties, the trial Court (Small Cause Judge, Lashkar) dismissed the suit on the two grounds: First, that because the plaintiff had neglected to sue the principal debtor, the liability of the surety came to an end. In holding this, the trial Court relied on Section 134 of the Contract Act. The Court also held that the debt is not proved. Against this decision, the plaintiff has filed this ...
Sarwansingh Gajjan Singh Jat Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP230
ORDERAbdul Hakim Khan, J.1. The accused, Sarwan Singh son of Gajjan Singh resident of Beas Find (Punjab) was convicted by the Additional City Magistrate, Lashkar, under Sections 170 and 419 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year, and a year and a half respectively. The accused filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge Gwalior but it was rejected. Now he has filed this revision.2. The prosecution story in short is that on 1-1-56, the accused went to the house of Mr. Vishwanath Singh, Additional Supserintendent Police, Lashbar and told him that hi name was Ratansingh and that he was a Sub-Inspector of police, Ambala, and that he had come to Lashkar to effect the arrest of some persons who were living in Dabra and who were wanted in a Criminal case pending against them in Punjab. He further asked the Additional Superintendent of Police to phone up the Officer-in-charge of Datara Police Station and to make enquiries as to whether the wanted persons...
Bansilal Vs. State of Madhya Bharat and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-1958
Reported in: (1958)IILLJ587MP
Dixit, J.1. The point raised in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is about the validity of a notification issued by the Madhya Bharat Government under Section 4(1)(i) of the Madhya Bharat Shops and Establishments Act, 1952. The Act came into force on 22 April 1952, in those areas of Madhya Bharat which were specified in Sch. I to the Act which included Indore City. Clauses (a) to (ft) of Section 4(1) enumerated the persons and establishments to which the Act was not applicable. Clause (i) of Section 4(1) gave to the Government the power 'to exempt from the operation of the Act' any other establishment or class of establishments or person or class of persons by issuing a notification in that behalf in the official gazette. On 5 August 1954, the Madhya Bharat Government issued a notification under Section 4(1)(i) inter alia exempting:Dukan yevam vyavasayik va anya sabhi samsthanonke niyoktha (in Hindi)from the operation of Sections 10, 16 and 17 of the Act. Sec...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›