Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Mishrimal Vs. District Co-operative Grower's Association Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP40
Shriastava, J. 1. This first appeal has been filed by the plaintiff against the decree of the Additional District Judge, Balaghat, dismissing the suit. 2. On 31-7-1950, the Honorary Secretary of the defendant Co-operative Society made a reference to the Registrar that the plaintiff as a Treasurer of the Society had not accounted for the moneys received by him as such. The plaintiff had admittedly a sum of Rs. 3415-10-8 with him on behalf of the Society, but the dispute arose regarding an item of Rs. 7397-8-0 received by him on the encashment of a hundi which was appropriated by him towards, dues which he had to recover as commission agent. The Registrar gave an award on 30-6-1951 holding that the plaintiff (appellant) was liable to pay Rs. 10,462-15-6 to the defendant. The plaintiff challenged the validity of the award. 3. The plaintiff admitted that his family firm Raotmal Mishrimal acted as a Treasurer from 20-2-1948 till 31-7-1950, but he himself was neither the Treasurer nor a memb...
Mst. Anjubai Vs. Hemchandrarao and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1960MP382
Shrivastava, J. 1. This first appeal arises out of a suit which was instituted by the appellant Mst Anjubai and Mst. Gajjubai (plaintiff-respondent No. 31 in forma pauperis for possession of certain malik makbuza lands left by their brother Tatya Rao, who died in 1931. 2. After the death of Tatya Rao in 1931, his widow Mst. Manjubai continued in possession of the suit lands till her death on 2-8-1950. She adopted respondent No. 1 Hemchandra Rao alias Madhukarrao. Respondent No. 2 Narayanarao Ka-dam is the natural father of Hemchandra Rao and the brother of Mst. Manjubai deceased. 3. The plaintiffs' case is that the property passed to them by inheritance after Mst. Manjubai's death as the next roversioners of Tatya Rao. The claim of Hemchandra Rao as the adopted son of Mst. Manjubai is disputed on the ground that the ceremony of 'datta homam' was not performed at the time and that the consent of Mst. Manjubai was brought about by undue influence practised by Narayan Rao, who was acting ...
Badri Narayan Harnand Roy Vs. Jawahar Singh Maniram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP29
Shiv Dayal, J.1. This is decree-holder's appeal since his application for execution has been dismissed by both the Courts below.2. The decree was based on a compromise arrived at in a suit for the recovery of Rs. 870/-.In the compromise it was agreed by the parties that the defendant would repay the debt in cash and kind by instalments :11/2 mani millets (jwar) on Maghbadi 15 Samvat 2011, 11/2 mani wheat on Baisakh Sudi 15 Samvat 2012 and also Rs. 25/- in cash, 11/2 mani millets on Magh Badi 15 Samvat 2012, and 11/2 mani wheat on Baisakh Sudi 15 Samvat 2113. It was further stipulated that in case of default the plaintiff would be entitled to recover the entire amount.3. The decree-holder admitted to have receivedl from the judgment-debtor.11/2mani millets in Phalgun Samvat 2011, and 11/2mani wheat in Jeth Samvat 2012, 25/- cash on June 17, 1955. 11/2 mani millets in Magh Samvat 2012 and Rs. 90/- cash, in lieu of 11/2 mani wheat, in Jeth Samvat 2013. It has been thus admitted by the ...
Chiman Singh Sultansingh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1960MP394; 1960CriLJ1619
Khan, J.1. The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Morena, convicted the eight accused appellants under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them each to life imprisonment. Against their conviction and sentences, the accused have filed this appeal.2. Before beginning arguments on the merits of the case, Mr. Anand, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the trial court refused to summon the material evidence of the defence and requested that that evidence should either be recorded here or the case be sent back to the trial court for recording that evidence and giving the judgment afresh after considering that evidence.3. It appears from the record that while the defence evidence was being recorded, the counsel of the accused submitted an application on 7-3-59 requesting the court that Gyasiram and Radha Ramanteachers of a village School, and the Station Master of the Jora Railway Station be summoned and examined in the case as defence witness...
Burhanpur Tapti Mills Ltd. Vs. Labour Officer, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1960MP370; [1960(1)FLR553]; (1961)ILLJ269MP
Dixit, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing six certificates issued by the opponent No. 4, the Government of Madhya Pradesh, Labour Department, under Section 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for recovery of certain amounts said to be payable as compensation to six workers of the petitioner-Mills who were laid off under the provisions of the Act, and for quashing the notices of demand served by the Naib Tehsildar, Burhanpur, on the basis of those certificates.2. The material facts are that in 1958 six workers of the petitioner-Mills, who had been laid off, applied to the Government for payment of layoff compensation for the period from July to October 1957 under Sections 25C and 33C of the Act. The applications were made under Rule 62 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Disputes Rules, 1957. On receipt of the applications, the Labour Commissioner acting under the said rule directed the Labour Officer, Burhanpur, to enquire into ...
Lala Bhagatram Pyarelal Chhatri Vs. Bhakluram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1960
Reported in: AIR1963MP56
Dixit, C.J. 1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Utters Patent from a decision of Tare J. arises out of a suit filed by the respondents, who as remote reversionary heirs of one Sukhlat claimed a declaration that the sale of the land in suit affected by Mst. Jagarmati, the widow of Sukhlal, in favour of the defendant-appellant did not affect the rights of any of the reversionary heirs after the death of the alienor. The plaintiffs joined in the suit three nearer reversioners as defendants alleging that they were neither prepared to file a suit for declaration nor were they ready to support the plaintiff's claim. The suit was decreed by the Civil Judge, Second Class, Bilaspur. Thereupon the appellant Bhagatram, who had purchased the property, unsuccessfully appealed first to the District Judge of Bilaspur, and then to this Court 2. The only question that arises for determination in this appeal is whether in the presence of nearer reversioners the plaintiffs were entitled to challenge th...
Fattu Bhila Vs. Bhawaniram Dashrath
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP27
H.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant, now being continued by his legal representatives, from the concurrent judgments of the lower Courts decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for declaration of title and restoration of possession. The main question at this stage is one of law, whether the defendant, having recovered the properties in the suit from third-parties after litigation prosecuted by huh as the guardian of the plaintiff, and continuing in possession as guardian and manager of the plaintiff, can, without discharging his duties as guardian and manager by giving up possession, now be heard to plead that the decree in favour of his ward was illegal, and he is entitled to retain the property as one of the two reversioners.Secondly, a less important question is, whether the decision of the Courts of that time granting the property to the plaintiff on the basis of a will, can now be challenged because of a law banning the bequests of agricultural lands without the san...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ganga Singh and Ghamandi Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ122
ORDERShiv Dayal, J.1. The respondent was put up for trial before the Special Court Bhind constituted under Section 12 of the Madhya Bharat Public Security Act, 1954, hereinafter called the Act. The learned Special Judge after examining the documents filed before him under Section 173 Cri. P.C. refused to frame a charge, Aggrieved by the order of discharge, the State Government has come here in revision.2. Shri Inamdar's preliminary objection is that under the Act this Court has no jurisdiction to set side an order of discharge, inasmuch as Section 19(2) of the Act limits the powers of this Court to those contained in Sections 423, 426, 427 and 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In my opinion, this objection Is without substance. While dealing with the question whether a Special Judge appointed under the Act is empowered to discharge the accused, I shall discuss the various provisions of the Act relating to the procedure to be followed in a trial before him.Here it will suffice to m...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Shri Dayaram Rathod
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1960
Reported in: [1961]12STC572(MP)
ORDERP.V. Dixit, C.J. 1. This order shall also govern Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 306 of 1957.2 These are two references by the Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, under Section 23(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1947. They arise out of orders of assessment to sales tax on the assessee Dayaram Rathod for the period from 22nd October, 1949, to 9th November, 1950, (Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 306 of 1957) and for the period from 10th November, 1950, to 30th October, 1951, (Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 305 of 1957). The questions referred to for the opinion of this Court in the two references are identical. They are, namely:-(1) Whether paragraphs 2 and 4 of the agreement relate to different types of transactions If so,(2) Whether in respect of transactions under paragraph 4, the non-applicant could be assessed as a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the M.P. Sales Tax Act?3. The material facts are that the assessee who does business in the name and style of 'Indian Mill...
In Re: FidahussaIn S/O Abdulji Bohara
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ674
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is a reference by the learned-Sessions Judge, Ratlam, made on an application' by one of the persons on trial before the Magistrate 1st Class., for contravention of the provisions of paras 4, 5 and 15 (3) of the Iron and' Steel Control Order and notifications issued under it, in exercise of the powers conferred on the Central Government under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The learned Sessions Judge was probably influenced by a ruling of this High Court which it has since been set aside by the Supreme Court. He has also not looked into the implications of paragraph 5 of the said. Order.2. Iron and Steel being essential commodities as defined in the Essential Commodities Act! of 1955, the Central Government has promulgated the Iron and Steel Control Order, 1956. Under Para 4 of the Order, Iron and Steel can be acquired on permits, subject to the conditions mentioned in them. In addition the' Iron and Steel Controller is empowered under Rul...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »