Madhya Pradesh Court February 1959 Judgments
Sitaram Madan Ahir Vs. Rajkunwarbai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1959
Reported in: AIR1959MP275
ORDERP.V. Dixit, J. 1. The facts of this reivision petition are that the applicant instituted a suit against the opponents for a permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with the plaintiffs possession of certain lands as an Inam tenant. After the filing of the suit, the plaintiff applied for. a temporary injunction. A notice of this application was given to the defendants. In response to this notice, the opponents appeared on 14-8-1957 and asked for time to file their reply to the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. The trial Court granted them time till 21-8-1957. On this date the defendants again asked for time which was refused. The lower Court then made an order of temporary injunction prohibiting the defendants from disturbing the plaintiff's possession. No appeal was filed by the defendants against the order of the trial Court granting] ad-interim injunction. On 23-8-1957, the defendants made an application under Order 39, Rule 4, C. P. C., for dischar...
Tag this Judgment!Ajudhee Bai Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1959
Reported in: AIR1959MP338
H.R. Krishnan, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 82 of the Employees State Insurance Act (Act XXXIV of 1948) from the judgment of the Employees' State Insurance Court, Gwalior, refusing to grant the appellant a life pension calculated according to the formula in the scheme on the ground that her husband had died as a result of 'employment injury' as defined in Section 2(8) of the Act.2. An appeal under Section 82, it may be noted, is a special appeal that lies only if it involves a substantial question of law. It is urged on behalf of the appellant that the substantial question of law is the interpretation of the phrase 'employment injury'.3. The facts are admitted. The appellant's husband was an employee of the C. I. M. M. Go, Birlanagar and died suddenly in the premises of the Factory on 25-7-57. It appears that he was going to join his duty in his shift but had not begun working, a circumstance which is of no significance, either way. It is also common ground that the death was ...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Narayan and anr. Vs. Prabhoo Dayal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP22
Naik, J.1. (On difference between A.H. Khan and H.R. Krishnan JJ.). This case comes before me on a difference of opinion between Khan, J. and Krishnan, J., on the question of interpretation of Section 7(2) of the Gwailor, Indore and Malwa United State (Madhva Bharat), Sthan Niyantran Vidhan, Samvat 2006 (Madhya Bharat Act No. 15 of 1950), hereinafter referred to as the 'Madhya Bharat Act'.2. The facts relevant for the purpose may shortly be stated. The petitioners are the landlords, while the respondent is the tenant of certain premises situate in Murar (former Gwalior State). In 1948, the Sthan Niyantran Visheshagya, Gwalior State, Samavt 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the Gwalior Ordinance) was in force in the Gwalior State. The Gwalior Ordinance provided that if for any reason the landlord or the tenant, as the case may be, claimed that the rent was inadequate or excessive, he might institute a suit for fixation of rent in the Court of the Sub-Judge having jurisdiction as provided...
Tag this Judgment!Waman Karpe Vs. State and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1959
Reported in: AIR1959MP322
Krishnan, J. 1. The applicant, who is an Excise Officer, has been reduced in rank by order of the Commissioner, Customs and Excise, Mudhya Bharat dated 10-9-1953 alter inquiry and the usual proceedings and notices. Alter filing his appeals and revisions to the Government, the applicant has moved this Court for an order in the nature of a writ directing the Government to restore him to the rank and pay that he held originally and make good the reduction in salary consequent on the order of reduction in rank. The grounds are apparently multiludious and the arguments have been very lengthy. However, they can be divided into three headings viz:-- (i) Grounds immediately based on Article 311(1) to the effect that the Commissioner, Customs and Excise Madhya Bharat was subordinate in rank to the appointing authority which the applicant asserts was the Government', presumably the Government of Madhya Bharat. (ii) Those based on alleged breach or non-observance of the provisions in the rules m...
Tag this Judgment!Brijlal and ors. Vs. Nandkishore and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP40
T.C. Shrivastava, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the defendants against whom the respondents' claim for mesne profits has been decreed.2. The lands in dispute are malik makbuzafields Khasra Nos. 187 and 188 in village MadiaAgrasen, Tehsil Rehli. These fields originally belonged to one Kanhaiyalal, who left behind threesons: Manoharlal, Bhagwandas and Chhotelal. Bya registered deed, dated 11-5-1945, Chhotelal transferred the whole fields to the defendants in defiance of the rights of his co-sharers. The defendants continued in possession of the fields from thatdate. The plaintiffs purchased the two-third shareheld by the other two co-sharers in the fields andthen filed Civil Suit No. 62-A of 1951 and succeeded in obtaining joint possession in the land to theextent of two-third share finally by a decree passed by the appellate Court on 24-8-1954. Theythen brought the present suit claiming mesne profits for the years 1949-50 to 1953-54. :3. The defendants disputed the amount cl...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Mumtaz Ali Faiz Ali and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1959
Reported in: AIR1959MP387; 1959CriLJ1337
Newaskar, J. 1. These appeals Nos. 111 to 123 of 1958 are preferred by the State Government under Section 417 of the Cr. P. C. against the orders of acquittal recorded by the Additional District Magistrate, Mandsaur. The accused in all these cases were prosecuted for an offence under Section 3(2)(c) and 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, read with Foreigners Laws Amendment Act, 1957.2. Questions involved in all these cases are almost common but for slight variation as to facts. It is therefore considered proper to deal with them together and to dispose them of by this judgment.3. In order to facilitate consideration of the principal question involved in these cases it is considered convenient to deal with the case of Mumtazali referable to Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 1958 and the conclusions arrived at on the basis of contentions raised on either side will be applied to the rest of the cases,4. The case against Mumtazali son of Faizali at present residing in Mandsaur is (hat he came to Man...
Tag this Judgment!Bootan Bai Vs. Durgaprasad Chatura
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1959
Reported in: AIR1959MP410
ORDERT.C. Shrivastava, J. 1. The suit out of which this petition for revision arises was instituted by the non-applicant Durgaprasad against the petitioner Smt. Bootan Bai for restitution of conjugal rights. An objection was taken on behalf of the applicant that in view of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the suit was not tenable in the regular civil Court. This objection has been overruled by the trial Court and the petitioner has, therefore, come up in revision.2. Section 9 of the Act provides for petitions for restitution of conjugal rights. The petition has to be filed in the principal Court of original civil jurisdiction and has to be decided in accordance with the procedure provided in the Code of Civil Procedure (Sections 19 and 21). Section 4 of the Act provides that 'any other law in force immediately before the commencement of this Act shall cease to apply to Hindus in so far as it is inconsistent with any of the provisions conta...
Tag this Judgment!Gokulsingh Vs. Indore-malwa United Mills, Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1959
Reported in: (1960)ILLJ330MP
Shivdayal, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the judgment of the industrial court, Madhya Pradesh, Indore. The petitioner was in the employment pf the respondent. He was dismissed by the employer on 9 December petitioner went to the labour court, Indore, but did not succeed there. He then filed an appeal to the industrial court and that appeal (No. 27 of 1954) was partly allowed and the order of dismissal was converted into that of discharge.2. The present grievance of the petitioner is that the above order of the industrial court passed on 15 September 1955 was not being complied with by the employer inasmuch as(i) the employer was not giving him 14 days' wages (Rs. 44-12-6),(ii) 15 days' leave with pay (Rs. 48), and(iii) gratuity equal to 20 months' pay (Bs. 800).To enforce the order of the industrial court dated 15 September 1955 the petitioner made an application under Section 78(1) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act to the industria...
Tag this Judgment!Mannalal Sardarmal JaIn Vs. Ramkishan Jodhraj Maharaj
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1959
Reported in: AIR1959MP264; 1959CriLJ848
P.V. Dixit, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 476-B, Cr. P. C., from an order of the District Judge of Indore, directing a complaint to be filed against the appellant in respect of an offence under Section 193, I. P.C.2. The material facts are that in a suit filed by the respondent against the appellant and his brother Dhannalal in the Court of the District Judge of Indore, for the recovery of Rs. 63227-8-0 as the balance due on account of certain transactions, the plaintiff tendered in evidence a statement of accounts said to have been made up by the appellant himself in his own hand. The appellant denied that the statement was written out by him. In his evidence the plaintiff Ramkishan stated that the appellant had himself written out the statement of accounts in question and had given it to him.The plaintiff also examined a handwriting expert to show that the statement was in the handwriting of the appellant. On a consideration of the statement of the plaintiff and the deposition...
Tag this Judgment!Hemchand Kishorilal Vs. Tekchand Kalloolal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1959
Reported in: AIR1959MP403
ORDERT.C. Shrivastava, J.1. This petition for revision has been filed by Hemchand, who is one of the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor, against the order of the executing Court, dated 31-8-1957, by which he and his three sons have been brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased judgment-debtor Kishorilal and non-applicants Nos. 1 and 2 have been brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased decree-holder Kalloolal. Kalloolal had obtained a decree against Kishorilal on 21-3-1950.The judgment-debtor Kishorilal died on 10-11-1953 and an application to bring the petitioner and his three sons on record was filed on 6-2-1954. While this application was pending, the decree-holder Kalloolal also died on 29-10-1954 and the non-applicants Nos. 1 and 2 (Tekchand and Suresh-chand) applied for being brought on record in his place on 30-8-1956. Both these applications were decided by the order under revision.2. The petitioner had objected to the applications o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »