Madhya Pradesh Court November 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.
Atmaram and anr. Vs. Smt. Amola Bai and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP402
ORDERK.L. Pandey, J.1. This revision is directed against an order of the Second Civil Judge, Bilaspur, dated 24 June, 1958 by which he held that it was- unnecessary for a represented plaint to follow once again the procedure prescribed by Order 33, Rules 3 and 4, of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The non-applicant No. 1 filed an application for permission to sue as a pauper in the Court of Civil Judge, First Class, Bilaspur. That application was allowed and her suit valued at Rs. 7,109/8/- was registered. Subsequently the applicant appeared to be entitled to a lesser share of smaller value in the property and she was permitted to amend the plaint which was, therefore, returned for presentation to the proper Court.On being represented through Counsel in the Court of Second Civil Judge, Bilaspur, the question was raised whether the procedure prescribed by Order 33, Rules 3 and 4, Civil Procedure Code, had to be followed afresh. The counsel for the non-applicant No. 1, being in doubt abou...
Sultan Khan Mangalkhan Vs. Gullu and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP99; 1959CriLJ327
A.H. Khan, J. 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 417(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code by a complainant Sultankhan after obtaining leave of the Court, against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shajapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 84 of 1956. 2. Sultan Khan filed a complaint before the First Class Magistrate, Shujalpur, against two respondents, Gullu aged 18 years and Noorkhan aged 20 years, under Sections 363, 461 and 379 I. P. C. on the allegation that on 14-12-55, the complainant had gone out of his village to attend a local Hat (Bazar), leaving behind his daughter Banno aged 4 years in the custody of his sister; that in his absence the two respondents went to his house and took away the minor girl with them to their mother. The appellant in his memo of appeal did not give the facts of the case correctly. The two accused are his brothers-in-law and the girl whom they took away is their niece. They took away the girl to their mother namely, ma...
Nathanlal Vs. State Industrial Court and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-1958
Reported in: (1960)ILLJ786MP
K.L. Pandey, J.1. This is a Letters Patent appeal directed against the order of Bhatt, J., dated 8 October 1957, by which the appellant's petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution was dismissed.2. The facts of the case are these. The petitioner was employed as a mechanic in Rajnandgaon Rice and Oil Mills on a monthly salary of Rs. 125. He was discharged from service by the employer on 14 March 1955. He made an application under Section 16(1) of the Industrial Disputes Settlement Act, 1947 (which will hereafter be referred to as the Act), to Sri L.S. Titus, Assistant Labour Commissioner, Nagpur, exercising the powers of the Labour Commissioner, who, by his order, dated 13 September 1955 passed under Section 16(2) of the Act, 'directed that the petitioner be reinstated within one week of the, order.3. On 19 September 1955, the petitioner's counsel wrote to the employer asking where and when the petitioner should resume his duties. The employer's counsel Sri K. M. Joshi, in ...
Gulabchand Gambhirmal Vs. Kudilal Govindram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP151
P.V. Dixit, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff is from a judgment and decree of a Division Bench of the Madhya Bharat High Court dated 2nd December 1948. It was filed in the Madhya Bharat High Court under Section 25 of the Madhya Bharat High Court of Judicature Act 1949 as it stood before it was amended by Madhaya Bharat Act No. 3 of 1950.2. The suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted on 6th November 1947 by Gulabchand Tongya against the heirs and legal representatives of Govindram Seksaria on the Original Side of the High Court of the former Indore State for specific performance of an agreement whereby, it is said, Govindram Seksaria agreed to sell to the appellant his share in a firm the business of which was to act as managing agents of the Indore Malwa United Mills Ltd., Indore.The suit was tried by Sanghi J., who on 11th June 1948 made a decree in favour of the plaintiff directing that on payment by the plaintiff to the defendant of 5/32 of the capital deed of assigning...
Managing Agents (MartIn and Co.) Vs. Seth Deokinandan and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP276
Pandey, J. 1. Messrs. Martin & Co. Managing Agents ot the S. S. Light Railway (defendant No. 2) have appealed against the lower Court's decree for Rs. 12,659/- on account of delayed delivery, deterioration and loss of goods consigned tor transport by rail. 2. The facts of the case, some of which were disputed in the lower Court but are no longer in controversy, are these. On 7th September 1947, Messrs. Raviprakash Om Prakash, a firm ot commission agents dealing in jaggery, booked at Khekra on the S. S. Light Railway a consignment of 199 bags of jaggery weighing 485 maunds to be delivered to them at Khandwa. The goods were carried in three N. G, Wagons Nos. 628, 666 and 741. The last two wagons, which contained 174 bags, were loaded and despatched on 9th September 1947 and reached Delhi-Sahadra on the same day. On that day, communal disturbances broke out at Delhi and affected the surrounding areas with the consequence that the working of railways was paralysed until about 20th Septembe...
Mst. Kanchan Bai Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP150; 1959CriLJ602
ORDERA.H. Khan, J.1. The short question to he considered in this revision is whether the presence of the accused, whose personal attendance has been excused, is necessary for explaining to him the charge under Section 251 (A) of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. In the instant case, the Police filed a Challan against Mst. Kanchan Bai under Section 324 I. P. C. She was exempted from personal attendance. At the time of framing the charge, it was suggested to the Court that the charge should be read over and explained to her personally and that she should be called in the Court for that purpose. The Court has for that reason ordered Mst. Kanchan Bai to appear in the Court. It seems that the Court thinks that the charge cannot be explained to the counsel of the accused, who has been permitted to appear on her behalf.3. I think that if the personal attendance of a person has been dispensed with and he is permitted to appear by his pleader, then such appearance involves the performance of all a...
Masalkhan S/O Kalandar Khan Vs. Custodian of Evacuee Property and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP256
P.K. Tare, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of Naik J. dated 20-7-1956 passed in Miscellaneous Petition No. 224 of 1956, refusing to issue a writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the orders of the authorities acting tinder the Administration of Evacuee Property Act (XXXI of 1950).2. This case has had a chequered history. The facts as established from the record are as follows :One Abdul Gafoor Khan, a fruit merchant of Bilaspur in Madhya Pradesh, went to village Pir Piyai (West Pakistan) in September, 1948 along with his wife, children and his parents. On 15-1-1949, Abdul Gafoor applied from village Pir Piyai for permission to come to India. A non-objection certificate dated 1-2-1949 was issued granting him the necessary permission. He returned to India on the said permit and again applied on 2-8-1949 for a permit to visit Pir Piyai. A temporary permit dated 26-8-1949 was granted to him, which was valid upto 25-8-1950. He overstayed th...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Hiralal Sutwala
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP93; 1959CriLJ325
ORDERM. Hidayatullah, C.J.1. The order in this case shall also govern the disposal of Criminal Revisions Nos. 403 and 407 of 1957.2. Criminal Revisions Nos. 402 and 403 of 1957 are references under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad, in two cases pending for trial in the criminal court below. Criminal Revision No. 407 of 1957 has been filed by one of the accused Hiralal Sutwala in whose favour also there is the reference in Criminal Revision No. 402 of 1957. As regards the last revision (Criminal Revision No. 407 of 1957), it is sufficient to say that Shri Chaturvedi of Allahabad, the learned counsel for Hiralal Sutwala did not press it. In view of this, the revision will have to be dismissed. I order accordingly.3. The other two revisions, as has been stated above, involve consideration of a reference made by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad, in which he has recommended the quashing of the charges framed against the ac...
Bhagwant Amarsingh Teli Vs. Mt. Manmati and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP249
P.K. Tare, J. 1. This case comes before us for decision upon a reference made by one of us (Tare J.) upon the following question : 'Whether a woman having interest in the joint family property by virtue of Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937, can challenge an alienation made by the manager of a joint Hindu family.' 2. The genealogy of the parties is as follows : GOPI (dead) | ___________________________________________________ | | (Died before = Mst. Narbadia Jaitram Nandram 1945) | (Plaintiff 2) | (Respondent 2) Darasram = Mst. Manmati (Plaintiff 1) (Respondent 1)3. The suit property i.e. khasra No. 1083/1 area 2.25 acres including other property was the-ancestral joint Hindu family property of Gopi. After his death, Nandram and Jaitram got the property. Nandram died sometime before the year 1945, leaving his widow, Mst. Narbadia and son Darasram. In the year 1945, there was a partition, between Darasram and Jaitram. Mst. Narbadia did not claim any share, no...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Imperial Tobacco Company of India Lt ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP232
P.K. Tare, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendants against the judgment and decree or Shri D. M. Aney, Second Civil Judge, First Class, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 21-B of 1952 decided on 7-2-1955.2. The respondent was the consignee of 751 cigarette cases booked from Chandisthan Railway Siding on 1-5-1950 to be delivered at Jabalpur at 'railway risk', On 18-5-1950, 68 cases were delivered to the plaintiff. One case was subsequently delivered on 9-4-1951 in a partly damaged condition. The parties mutually assessed the damage of the said case at Rs. 966-7-0. The respondent filed this suit on 2-7-1951 claiming an amount of Rs. 9,314-13-0 on account of the price of the six un-delivered cases and the value of the loss in the damaged case. In addition, the plaintiff claimed interest at Rs. 639-6-0. The trial Court decreed the principal claim and disallowed the claim for interest.3. In the present appeal we ore not concerned with the pleas raised in defence. The learned counsel for the appel...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›