Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Mst. Intiyajbi Amirkhan Vs. Newton Chikhli Colliery and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP329; (1960)ILLJ184MP
P.K. Tare, J. 1. This appeal shall also govern the decision of Misc. First Appeal No. 150 of 1955 (Mst. Kulsumbi v. Newton Chikli Colliery Parasia, District Chhindwara).2. This appeal is directed against the order passed by Shri C. B. Kekre, District Judge, and Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, Chhindwara, refusing to award the amount of compensation in favour of either of the appellants namely, Mst. Intiyajbi or Mst. Kulsumbi.3. One Sheikh Ibrahim, who was an employee of the Newton Chikli Colliery, met with an accident on 10-12-1954, as he was entrapped in a mine pit, which got flooded. As a result, he was drowned and he died. The Managing Director of the Colliery filed a statement before the Commissioner, under the Workmen's Compensation Act praying that the amount of compensation calculated at Rs. 1050/- be paid to the heirs of the deceased. In answer to notices, the two appellants put in their claims.The original appellant in Misc. First Appeal No. 142 of 1955 name...
State Vs. Dhanna Sewa
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP35; 1959CriLJ197
1. This is an appeal filed by the State Government under Section 417, Criminal Procedure Code, against the order of the Additional District Magistrate, Ujjain, dated 16-12-1954 by which the respondent Dhanna was acquitted of a charge under Section 193, I.P.C.2. The respondent had given evidence in Criminal Case No. 8 of 1952 which was pending before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mahidpur. He stated on 21-7-1952 as follows :'Then it was decided to purchase two she-buffaloes and one calf for Rs. 200/-. Then Bihari brought Rs. 200/- from Nathu who is Patel of the village andtook the two she-buffaloes and the calf from the accused.'On 24-4-1953 he stated as follows :'No transaction of sale of any she-buffalo between Bihari Maharaj and the accused took place in my presence. Nor was any amount paid.' The charge framed under Section 193, I.P.C. was in the alternative under Section 236, Criminal Procedure Code that he made these two statements, one of which must necessarily be false.3. The Ad...
Kanhaiyalal Vs. Bhanwarlal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP379; 1958CriLJ1401
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an application by the private complainant in a criminal case under Section 417 (3) of the Cr. P. C. from an order of acquittal under Section 247 of the Criminal Procedure Code recorded by the Magistrate. The questions fire whether the Magistrate had, in this case, jurisdiction to acquit under the section, or whether, if he had jurisdiction, his reasoning is so perverse as to justify an appeal under Section 417, Cr. P. C. The first alternative is remediable by an application in revision; while the second may come under Section 417, Cr. P. C.2. The facts are that in the complaint case No. 164 of 1956 (one started after the coming into force of the Cr. P. C. Amendment Act, 1955, Act 26 of 1955), the two members of the opposite party were on trial under charges respectively under Ss. 323 and 324, I. P. C. The hearing had been completed before 10-12-1957, and that a date had been fixed for 'arguments'. It was again adjourned to 21-12-57 for this same purpose...
Beni Madhavprasad and ors. Vs. Rasklal Ambalal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP23
P.V. Dixit, J.1. The suit, out of which this appeal arises, was instituted by the present appellant's father Ramratanlal in the Court of Civil Judge, First Class, Mhow, against the respondents for the recovery of possession of house No. 1963 situated in Bhoi Mohalla, Mhow, and of a room in an adjacent house bearing No. 1012 and for mesne profits.2. The plaintiff Ramratanlal claimed that the property belonged to a joint Hindu family of which he was the Karta; that his father Ramkrishan had permitted his Munim Chunnilal, the father of the defendant-respondents Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 to live in house No. 1963 with his family free of rent; that after the death of Chunnilal, his widow & other members of his family were also allowed to occupy the house; that Chunnilal, who used to look after the management of houses belonging to the joint family, got one of the rooms in the adjoining house No. 1012, which had been rented out, vacated from the tenant for his own use and occupation, that Chunnilal...
Sheoramprasad Ram Narayanlal Bania Vs. Gopalprasad Parmeshwardayal Shu ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP102
G.P. Bhutt, J. 1. This is an appeal of the first defendant, Sheoram Prasad, against the order passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon, in Civil Suit No. 86-A of 1954, refusing to set aside an award. 2. Firm S. S. Gupta Bidi Works, Rajnandgaon, belonged jointly to Mst. Sheodulari, and the first defendant who is her husband's younger brother. Mst. Sheodulari is the wife of the third respondent, Sheogopal and step-mother of the plaintiff Sheokumar, respondent 4. The partnership acquired some immoveable properties at Rajnandgaon and other places. By a registered deed ated 27-7-1945, Mst. Sheodulari transferred her interest in the business and the properties to the plaintiff. On 1-12-1948, the plaintiff and the first defendant took Radheshyam, defendant 3, as a partner of -/4/- share in the partnership business, the remaining -/12/- share being owned equally by the plaintiff and the first defendant. The irnmoveable properties continued to be owned by the plaintiff and ...
Mahendra Singh Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP6
H.R. Krishnan, J. 1. The appellant having been convicted by the Special Judge Morena under Section 458 I. P. C, after a trial for a charge under Sections 395, 398 I. P. C., has come up in appeal on three grounds firstly, that the trial had been bad for want of jurisdiction, Section 398 I. P. C. not being included in the notified list of offences triable by the Special Judge. Secondly, that the charges having been under Sections 395, 398 I. P. C. a conviction under Section 458 I. P. C. was bad for prejudice as this case is not one coming properly under Section 237 Criminal Procedure Code or otherwise justified under Section 535 Cr. P. C. and thirdly on the facts. 1a. Under Section 14 of the Madhya Bharat Public Security Act, 1953 Special Courts are created for expeditious trial of certain criminal offences. Notifications are issued from time to time under that section empowering the special courts to try the notified offences, other offences being tried under the general procedure, as t...
Qamarali Wahid Ali Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP46
P.K. Tare, J.1. This second appeal has been-filed by the plaintiff, who lost in both the Courts below. His appeal before the District Judge was dismissed summarily without notice to the respondent. It is directed against the order of Shri C.B. Kekre, District Judge, Chhindwara, arising out of the judgment and decree passed by Shri S.M.I. Alvi, Civil Judge, Class I, Balaghat.2. The plaintiff-appellant was a Sub-Inspector of Police at Tendu Kheda in charge of the Police Station House. He, along with some others, had been prosecuted for offences under Sections 304, 331 and 201 of' the Indian Penal Code, in the Court of Shri J.N. Dutta, Magistrate, First Class, with powers under Section 30 of the Criminal procedure Code, who by judgment dated 7-7-1944, acquitted all the accused-honourably in criminal case No 54 of 1944. The matter was not taken up further by the prosecution against the said acquittal.The prosecution version was that the Sub-Inspector had been to the house of one Gokal to c...
Mishrilal Hazarilal Vs. Laxminarayan Kishanlal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP412
P.V. Dixit, J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff whose pre-emption suit has been dismissed by the Courts below. 2. The plaintiff's case was that he was the owner of a house adjacent to the house in suit which belonged to one Sheochand; that Sheochand sold his house on 28-5-1949 by a registered sale-deed to the respondent Laxminarayan that the deed recited a consideration of Rs. 951/- for the sale but the sale was actually for Rs. 600/-; and that Sheochand sold the house and Laxminarayan purchased it without informing him of the intended sale and without giving him any opportunity to pre-empt the property. The plaintiff proceeded to allege that on 2-6-1949 Laxminarayan sold the house to the respondent Mishrilal by a registered sale-deed for a supposed consideration of Rs. 1450/-. On these allegations, the plaintiff claimed that he was entitled to pre-empt the property for Rs. 600/-. The defendants contested the suit inter alia on the ground that the plaintiff was asked whether he wi...
Lalji Vs. the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1958
Reported in: [1958]9STC571(MP)
ORDER1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the assessments of sales tax for the years 1949-50, 1950-51, 1951-52 and the notices of demand for recovery of the arrears thereof, 2. The petitioner Lalji, Gendlal Patni and Chandratan entered into a partnership in or about April, 1947, for carrying on business of manufacturing utensils, brass-wares etc. under the name and style 'Bharat Metal Industries', Raipur. Chandratan retired from the partnership on 22nd April, 1952. Subsequently by a notice served on the petitioner, Gendlal dissolved the partnership on or about 13th September, 1952, and gave notice of dissolution to the Registrar of Firms under Section 63(1) of the Indian Partnership Act. He also instituted Civil Suit No. 25-A of 1952 on 28th October, 1952, in the Court of Additional District Judge, Raipur, against the petitioner and Chandratan for dissolution of the partnership and for rendition of accounts. A receiver was appointed by the Court on...
State Vs. Puranchand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP352; 1958CriLJ1398
T.C. Shrivastava, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 417 Criminal Procedure Code filed by the State Government against the order of the Sessions Judge Ujjain acquitting the non-applicant of an offence under Section 3 of the Untouchability (Offences) Act (No. 22 of 1955). The accused was tried summarily under Section 260 Criminal Procedure Code in Criminal Case No. 114 of 1955 and was sentenced to imprisonment for one month and a fine of Rs. 50/- only. He went up in appeal and the learned Sessions Judge set aside the conviction and acquitted him. 2. The non-applicant is admittedly the Pujari of a Jain temple in Ujjain. The prosecution case was that on 6-10-1955 the complainant Mohanlal who is Balai by caste, went to have a Darshan at the temple but the non-applicant locked the door of the temple and did not allow him to enter the temple and have a Darshan on the ground that he was an untouchable, 3. The non-applicant denied that he had locked the door of the temple or had prevented M...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »