Madhya Pradesh Court December 1960 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.
Bhagwandas Parsadilal Vs. Surajmal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP237
P.R. Sharma, J.1. This is a defendant's Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated the 12th of October, 1960 passed by the Addl. District Judge Gwalior, in Civil Appeal No. 57-A of 1960.2. The facts giving rise to the suit out of which the present appeal arises axe that the present appellant entered into an agreement on 9-3-1956 for purchase of the house in dispute for a sum of Rs. 4500/- from its owner Babulal. Surajmal and Kanhaiyalal with prior knowledge of this agreement purchased the said house on 7-4-1956 from Babulal for a Sum of Rs. 6000/- under a registered deed. The defendant was at the time of the sale occupying a shop forming part of the said house on a rent of Rs. 12/-/- p.m. On 26-5-1956 the present respondents served a registered notice on the defendant demanding arrears of rent from 7-4-1956.This notice was followed by another dated 9-7-1956 terminating the defendant's tenancy with effect from the 7th of September, 1956 or in the alternative from 10-9-1956. Thi...
Kanhaiyalal and ors. Vs. Devi Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP302; 1961CriLJ642
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J. 1. This case arises out of a report by the learned Sessions Judge Dewas, in an application in revision by the losing party in a proceedingunder the Code of Criminal Procedure, the nature of which is to be set out presently. This involves the consideration of the scope of the respective Sections 107 and 145 of the Code and the effect of mixing them up in a single proceeding.2. There was a dispute concerning some agricultural land, the identity of which was admitted by the parties. The applicants in revision were found by the learned First Class Magistrate not to have been in possession originally, but to have forcibly dispossessed the non-applicant within two months of the preliminary order of the learned magistrate. Till then, it was found that the non-applicant in revision was in possession. Accordingly, the magistrate made a final order under Section 145 in favour of the non-applicant directing the applicants to give up possession and not to disturb him, and fu...
Mulla BadruddIn Vs. Master Tufail Ahmed
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1960
Reported in: AIR1963MP31; 1962MPLJ61
Bhargava, J.1. This first appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of the contract of sale, instituted by the plaintiff-respondent in the Court of the Third Additional District Judge, Bhopal. The suit was decreed and, therefore, the defendant has come up in this appeal.2. The defendant contracted with the plaintiff to sell his house, situated in mohalla Nasarganj, Bhopal, the details whereof are fully given in. the plaint, for Rs. 23,000/- on 30-10-1953. Admittedly, out of (his amount, Rs. 15,5007- have been received by the defendant. Ex. P-l which records this transaction has been very informally and meagrely written. After mentioning the agreed price of sale and the portion paid, it only says that the plaintiff would call the defendant from his place of residence, Sironj, after Diwali, that is to say, after 6-11-1953, and after payment of the remaining amount, the defendant would execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff who is called 'Master Sahib'.3. T...
Ramchandra Vishnu Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP247
Pandey, J.1. This in a petition under Arts, 226 and 227 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ or order directing the State Government (respondent 1) and the Principal, Medical College, Indore (respondent 2), to admit the petitioner to one of the Medical Colleges in the State. 2. In this State, there are four Government Medical Colleges providing for admission of 330 candidates in the 1st year class. In the current year, the State Government constituted a Selection Committee of the Principals of the four colleges with the Principal, Medical College, Indore as Chairman, to recommend the names of candidates for admission to the Medical Colleges in accordance with 'Medical Collages in Madhya Pradesh Rules for Admission, 1960'. These Rules provide inter alia as follows:- '8. Selection of candidates from amongst those who have applied for admission, will be made on merit as disclosed by the marks obtained at the Inter Science Examination provided that candidat...
Calico Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP257
Dixit, C.J. 1. The question raised in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is whether entertainments duty is exigible from the petitioners under the Central Provinces and Berar Entertainments Duty Act, 1936. 2. The material facts are these. The first petitioner, the Calico Mills Ltd., Ahmedabad, is a company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of textiles. The second petitioner is an employee of the Calico Mills Ltd., whose duty is to exhibit Calico doth fabrics and advertise them for sale. In the usual course of their business the petitioners put up a canvas canopy styling it as 'Calicloth Dome' on an open piece of land in Jabalpur for display and sale of the goods of the Calico Mills. The Dome was enclosed on three sides. 1C was kept open on the side facing Jabalpur--Gwarighat road. The petitioners say that this side was kept open to enable all persons passing on the road and bystanders to have a clear perspective of the goods displayed for sale i...
Mulla Haji Yusufali and anr. Vs. Pandit Laxminarayan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP311
Pandey, J. 1. This appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (u) of the Code of Civil Procedure comes before us on a reference under Rule 9 (2) (a) of the High Court Rules for consideration of a substantial question of law involving interpretation of the Constitution by a larger Bench. 2. The question is whether Section 11 sixthly of the Bhopal Pre-emption Act, 1934 (III of 1934) providing for a right of pre-emption 'in the persons who own immovable property contiguous to the property sold' is void as offending against the provisions of Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution. It arises in this manner. By a sale deed dated 14 June 1955, the appellant 1 sold his shop situate in Bhopal town to the appellant 2 for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- without the consent or knowledge of the respondent, who owned immovable property contiguous to that shop.Since the respondent's request for being allowed to pre-empt the sale was not accepted, he filed the suit out of which this appeal arises. The Court of first instance d...
Rishabhkumar Vs. K.C. Sharma and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP329
Dixit, C.J.1. This Letters Patent appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for damages for malicious prosecution is from a judgment of Tare, J., in second appeal No. 243 of 1957 whereby reversing the decision of the Second Additional District Judge, Sagar, he dismissed the plaintiffs suit.2. The plaintiff's case, stated quite broadly, was that he was a respectable citizen of Khurai and of the State and was also President of the All India Digamber Jain Parwar Sab^a and of Municipal Committee, Khorai; that the respondent Sharma was on inimical terms with him and bore malice against him for various reasons; that in order to disgrace him Sharma as President of the Municipal Committee lodged a report with Khurai police that a road roller belonging to the Municipal Committee Bad been stolen by him and was lying on his farm; that when the police declined to take any action on this report the said respondent directed the second respondent Shridhar Ghanshayam, an employee of the Municipal Committee, t...
Gopal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Secretary, Education Department)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1960
Reported in: (1962)IILLJ249MP
K.L. Pandey, J.1. This matter comes before me on a difference between Khan, J., and Shivdayal, J.2. The main question is whether Article 311(2) of the Constitution applies to the facts of this case. The petitioner was an employee of the erstwhile Gwalior State which merged on 15 April 1948. The process of integration of services of the various princely States, including Gwalior State, constituting the new State of Madhya Bharat, continued right upto 1 November 1956 when, in pursuance of the provisions of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, the new State of Madhya Pradesh came into existence. By an order of the Director of Education dated 27 December 1955, the petitioner, who was treated to have been a clerk on 15 April 1948, was directed to be Integrated as a head clerk. Being aggrieved by that order, the petitioner filed an appeal claiming that, on 15 April 1948, he was working as a camp clerk and was not a mere clerk in the office of the Director of Education. The Government of Madh...
LuxminaraIn Pathak Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP365
Dixit, C.J.1. The applicant was formerly employed in the Police Department as a Sub-Inspector. In 1955 when he was posted at Jabalpur an enquiry was held against him on a charge of making a false entry in police rojnamcha about keeping of surveillance on one Nonelal who was actually in jail on the date of the entry. The enquiry was held by the City Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur, and at the end of the enquiry the petitioner was asked to show cause why he should not be fined Rs. 15.In response to this notice the petitioner represented that the enquiry should be held afresh by some other authority. Subsequently, the notice to show cause why he should not be fined was cancelled and a second enquiry was held by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur on a charge framed by the District Superintendent of Police; On the basis of his report the District Superintendent of Police made a recommendation that having Regard to the previous bad record of the petitioner he should be dismisse...
Hariprashad Narayanjee Jaiwal Vs. Chandrojirao Sambhajeerao Angre
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1962MP69
V.R. Newaskar, J.1. The only question involved in this second appeal is regarding the liability of the appellant as a surety.2. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent was the Jagirdar of the village Nevari Bhavrasa which included a Forest area known as Karanaved Forest. The Jagir was then under the Court of Wards. The Forest Officer in charge of this forest put up for sale by auction the rights of exploitation of the same on 25-11-1944 in accordance with the terms and conditions laid down in the sale-proclamation. The sale was knocked down in favour of Abdul Hamid defendant No. 1 for a sum of Rs. 4,105/-and thereafter an agreement was executed by Abdul Hamid after the auction sale was sanctioned On 11-12-1944 by the Superintendent Court of Wards, under whose charge the said estate had been placed by the Government order. Intimation of this sanction was given to Abdul Hamid on. 22-12-1944. Later, as contemplated by the terms of auction sale, the purchaser Abdul Hamid ex...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »