Madhya Pradesh Court July 1959 Judgments
Sheokumar Balaram Pathak Vs. M.A. Khan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP37
Shrivastava, J.1. This Letters Patent appeal has been filed by the petitioner Sheo Kumar against the order of Sen J, dismissing his petition (Misc. Petition No. 29 o 1957) in motion hearing on 5-2-1957.2. The petitioner and respondent No. 5 Jagan-nath Prasad were Panchas of the Gram Panchayat of mouza Ghutku, Tahsil and District Bilaspur. A meeting was held on 7-1-1957 for electing a Sar-panch. It was presided over by Jhagruram (respondent No. 3). The petitioner and Jagannath Prasad (respondent No. 5) were candidates for the office of Sarpanch. The petitioner objected to the nomination of Jagannath Prasad on the ground that he was in arrears of taxes payable to the Gram Panchayat for one year and was not, therefore, duly qualified for contesting the elections. The objection was rejected by respondent No. 3, who as stated above, presided over the meeting. After the election. Jagannath Prasad (respondent No. 5) was declared duly elected. In the petition it was also stated that the electi...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Makhanlal Girwarlal Vs. HarnaraIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP56
Shiv Dayal, J. 1. This is a first appeal by the plaintiff firm whose suit has been dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Gwalior. 2. The facts are these. On 20-12-1952 Har Narain defendant No. 1, on behalf of himself and his minor son Ramjidas defendant No. 2, mortgaged a house in Janakganj, Lashkar for Rs. 8,000/-in favour of the plaintiff. The mortgage money was repayable within three years. There was a subsequent charge created by a deed of 30-3-1933 for Rs. 3,000/- on the same terms and conditions. On 1-6-1942 the mortgagors sold a part of the property to one Mataprasad and the latter paid to the mortgagee firm a sum of Rs. 12,000/- on 1-8-1942 when the portion sold to Mata Prasad was released by the mortgagee. 3. The present suit was brought by the mortgagee on 19-12-1947 for Rs. 15,299/9/-. 4. Har Narain's defence was that the amount paid to the mortgagee on 1-8-1942 was in full and final satisfaction of the mortgage debt. 5. Ramjidas defendant No. 2 resisted the suit inter...
Tag this Judgment!Lalaram Hari Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP59; 1960CriLJ237
A.H. Khan, J. 1. The Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilsa, convicted the accused under Section 376 I. P. C. and sentenced him to 2 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Against his conviction and sentence, he has filed this appeal. 2. The prosecution case is that the accused along with three minor girls (Evti, Bhagwati and Chironji) went for grazing cattle near the river Betwa. At about noon, the accused Lalaram asked the two younger girls (Bhagwati and Chironji) to go ahead and after the coast was clear, the accused took the girl Mst. Evti, aged about 12 years to an adjoining depression near the river, and, there ravished her. The act caused rupture of hymen and the pain was so intensely severe that Mst. Evti could not go back home. She remained lying in the field and it is said that in the evening, the accused Lalaram went to the house of her father and informed him tha...
Tag this Judgment!Sampatbai W/O Ambaram and anr. Vs. Madhusingh Gambhirji
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP84
ORDERP.V. Dixit, J. 1. The opponent has instituted a suit against his sister-in-law (brother's wife) for a declaration that after the death of his father Gambhirji and his brother Ambaram, the husband of Sampatbai, he alone was entitled to the Pakka tenancy rights in the agricultural lands specified in para 2 of the plaint that Sampatbai had no right in them whatsoever; and that the mutation made in her favour in regard to those lands was illegal and ineffective.The plaintiff also claimed possession of the lands in suit from Sampatbai and mesne profits. One of the objections taken by Sampatbai in defence is that Narayansingh, who is the adopted son of Ambaram, is a necessary party to the suit. The learned Civil Judge, First Class, Dhar, who is trying the suit, held on 9-7-1958 that Narayansingh was not a necessary party. Thereafter on 10-9-1958 an application was made on behalf of minor Narayansingh by Sampatbai acting as his guardian for being made a defendant in the suit. This applic...
Tag this Judgment!Bhaiyalal Godre and ors. Vs. Smt. Rajrani and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP147
Pandey, J.1. The defendants 1 to 3 have appealed against the lower Court's decree for Rs. 5,500/- passed against them and defendant 4 for rashness and negligence of the defendant 4 in driving a motor truck, which resulted in the death of one Fakirchand.2. The undisputed facts are these. On 4-8-1951, Fakirchand had engaged the motor truck No. 352 C.P.S. belonging to the defendants 1 to 3 for carrying stones from the quarry at village Atta to Sagar. It was understood that the truck would be driven by the defendant 4, a driver in the employ of the first 3 defendants. On the same day, at about midnight, when Fakirchand and his 3 coolies were also travelling on the truck laden with stones, it crossed a river called Mehar. Since the river was in spate, the force of water swept away the truck then driven by the defendant 4. As a consequence. Fakirchand and one cooly, by name Gyani, lost their lives.3. The plaintiff No. 1 (21 years) is the widow of Fakirchand. The other two plaintiffs are his ...
Tag this Judgment!Pirmohammad Kukaji Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-28-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP24; 1960CriLJ83
P.V. Dixit, J.1. The appellant Pirmohammad was tried by the third additional Sessions Judge of Indore on charges under Ss. 366 and 452, I. P. C. At the end of the trial, 'the learned additional Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty of both the offences and sentenced him to one and half years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 366, I. P. C., and to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 452, I P. C. The sentences are to run concurrently. The accused has now preferred this appeal against the convictions and sentences.2. The case for the prosecution was that Mst. Fatama was married to the appellant some ten years back when she was a minor. After the marriage, the accused did not keep her with him. Mst. Fatma, therefore, continued to live with her parents Kasam and Mst. Suraj. Two years after the marriage the parents of Mst. Fatma entreated the accused to keep Mst. Fatma with him and even sent messengers to him to persuade him to do so. But the appellant paid no heed to these...
Tag this Judgment!Gulabchand Kapur Chand Vs. Sawachand Bhola Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP70
1. This appeal arises out of an execution matter and the only question is whether the last application for execution of the decree is barred by Section 48 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The material facts are that on 29-3-1931 a decree was passed in favour of the appellant for Rs. 1205/- against the respondent. Execution was taken out on February 26, 1933 but was struck off on October 26, 1933 after recovery of Rs. 270/-. Another execution case No. 238 was instituted on October 20, 1934. A compromise was reached between the parties on June 20, 1937 which was recorded and given effect to by the court. By this compromise it was agreed that the judgment debtor was to pay a settled sum of Rs. 955/11/- by yearly instalments of Rs. 100/-. There was also the usual default clause, namely, that on failure to pay a single instalment the whole amount would become due and recoverable at once. The first instalment was to be paid on May 14, 1938.3. On July 9, 1938 a sum of Rs. 75/- was paid and o...
Tag this Judgment!Balchand S/O Bardichand Pamecha Vs. Mandsaur Municipality
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP20
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. The applicant has been convicted for the contravention of a provision regarding sanitation in the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, and has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2/-. The conviction was by a Magistrate who being the Chief Executive Officer, had been appointed under Section 187 of the said Act.2. The applicant has proceeded against this conviction and insignificant sentence with a grossly disproportionate zeal. It is usual in such cases of non-appealable sentences to insist upon the applicant moving the Sessions Judge for a reference. This applicant did so but allowed the application before the Sessions Judge to be dismissed for default. This alone might have justified the dismissal of this application; any way it has been admitted and is better heard on merits.3. A good deal of the argument centres round whether the facts justified the conviction. The applicant has a latrine which he constructed in 1937, and from which filth was seeping or leaking...
Tag this Judgment!Mansingh Amarsingh Vs. State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP125; 1960CriLJ487
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an application by a seller of milk, (which he described as cow's milk) convicted for the second time under Section 16(1) (ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. Awarded the minimum sentence of one year's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/- with further simple imprisonment in default, the applicant went in appeal. The appellate Court upheld the conviction, but reduced the sentence to simple imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 500/- only, which is below the minimum prescribed by law, the ostensible reason being that 'he was a poor man and it may be that he brought this milk from some one else and sold it without knowing that it was adulterated'.2. Whatever the merits of the conviction, the legal grounds, urged against which I shall examine presently, the reason given by the lower appellate Court for a lesser sentence is inadequate. Certainly, the appellate Court should examine the facts and see if the conviction is correc...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Karimunissa Vs. AlfuddIn Hafizuddin
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1959
Reported in: AIR1960MP76
Shrivastava, J.1. This first appeal by the plaintiff arises out of the judgment of the First Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 13-A of 1954, decided on 13-4-1956.2. The plaintiff Karimunnisa is the widow of one Tajuddin, who died in 1942. Defendant (respondent) Alfuddin is the brother of Tajuddin. The property in suit consists of a bungalow No. 162 and two plots Nos. 720 and 721, all situate at Jabalpur. It is not disputed that Tajuddin had borrowed Rs. 2500/- from Alfuddin on 25-10-1940. Tajuddin died on 24-1-1942 and Alfuddin sued Karimunnisa as his legal representative for the recovery of the debt. During the course of this suit (Civil Suit No. 3-B of 1942) the properties in dispute were attached before judgment.The claim was decreed on 22-9-1942 against the assets of the deceased Tajuddin in the hands of Karimunnisa. On 20-11-1943, Alfuddin started execution proceedings to have the attached property sold. The sale was held on 4-9-1944 and was confirmed on 3-11-...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »