Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Haji Latif Abdulla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP190
ORDERP.K. Tare, J. 1. This revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act is by the defendant, against the decree dated 10-11-1959, passed by Shri G.P. Tiwari, Second Additional District Judge, Raipur, empowered under Section 9 of the M.P. Courts Act, 1958, in Small Cause Suit No. 35 of 1959.2. The non-applicant was a consignee of 500 yards of hessian cloth and 25 maunds of sutli. The goods were delivered to him in a damaged condition. The Station Superintendent assessed the damage at 25 per cent regarding the hessian cloth and at 15 per cent in respect of the Sutli. The delivery was effected on 23-6-1956.3. The defence of the applicant was that the plaintiff had failed to prove the quantum of damages. Secondly it was contended that the suit filed on 17-2-1959 was barred by time under Article 30 of Schedule II of the Indian Limitation Act.4. The learned Small Cause Judge held that the quantum of damages had been proved by the plaintiff. As regards the question of li...
Umrao Singh and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP45; 1961CriLJ270
ORDERShiv Dayal, J. 1. The petitioners Umrao Singh and Kunwarlal have been convicted of the offence under Section 323 of the Penal Code and sentenced to 2 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25/-. Petitioner Ghasiram has been convicted of the offence under Section 352 of the Penal Code and sentenced to 2 months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25/-.2. The case for the prosecution was that on 27-8-1959 the petitioners belaboured Barelal who had gone out to graze his cattle, and who was blamed by the accused to have caused damage to their crops. Initially the case was registered as a non-cognizable one, but subsequently, when it was discovered on medical report that grievous hurt had been caused, the case was challaned by the police. Barelal, however, died a natural death after six months of the occurrence but before he could be examined as a witness.3. Shri Dey contends that the F. I. R. lodged by Barelal could not be considered by the courts below and that the evidence ...
Pannalal and ors. Vs. Mahachandi Sawaldas and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP107
ORDERShiv Dayal, J.1. This revision is directed against an order passed by the Small Cause Judge, Gwalior, whereby he has overruled preliminary objections of the defendant. A compromise decree was passed in an earlier suit arising out of a dispute relating to a wall between the respective properties of the parties. One of the terms of the compromise was that the defendant would construct a wall from the road to the patio, mentioned therein, at his own expense. The present suit instituted by Mahachandi was based on the allegation that the defendant constructed the wall only 9' wide instead of 1'-6' wide and the plaintiff had to complete it by spending Rs. 190/- which he claimed to recover from Pannalal defendant.2. Shri Gupta's contention is that the suit was barred by Section 47 of the C. P. C.; the only remedy open to the plaintiff was to execute the compromise decree. Reliance is placed on Zakarali v. Israr Hussain, AIR 1947 Nag 53. In my opinion, this contention is untenable. I have...
Narayan Singh Vs. Rajmal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP12; 1961CriLJ91
V.R. Newaskar, J.1. This is a petition under Section 417 (3) of the Cr. P.C. against an order of acquittal recorded by the Additional District Magistrate Mandsaur in a case started on a complaint of the petitioner under Section 500, I. P.C.2. The facts of the case are that a certain defamatory matter appeared in the issue of 'Dwaja' of 25-5-1955 which is published from Mandsaur. That defamatory matter with reference to the petitioner's Hotel had the effect of adversely affecting his business and also of bringing him down in the eyes of the public.3. The defence of the opponent was that on the material date he was absent on duty having entrusted the work to a competent person who was the sub-editor.4. The learned court below held that on the material date the opponent had gone out to Ratlam and that the news item was not printed by the Assistant Editor Mangilal and that therefore although the matter published was defamatory the opponent could not be held criminally liable. It therefore ...
Parasram Shivlal Tara Sewania Vs. Laxminarayan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP8; 1961CriLJ88a
Krishnan, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave under Section 417(3) Cr. P.C., by the complainant in a complaint case from the judgment of acquittal of the First Class Magistrate Bhopal (Shri B. L. Agarwal) dated 19-2-1958 but delivered on the next day by his successor. The memorandum shows that the complainant would very much like to raise the merits of the acquittal but the special leave order by this Court shows that it was admitted only for consideration of 'the question of legality of the judgment which was written by the trying magistrate but was pronounced by his successor in office'. I would, therefore, examine this question only. If this is held to be illegal, the case should go back for the pronouncement of the judgment by the trying magistrate himself, who should be posted back to that station for this purpose alone. On the other hand, if it is not illegal, the matter should rest. 2. While the Civil P.C., expressly provided for many such situations, the Cr. P.C., is more ...
Jasram and anr. Vs. State Transport Authority and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP81
Pandey, J. 1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against a revisional order of the State Transport Authority (respondent 1) dated 20-11-1959, by which an order of the Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior (respondent 2) dated 24/25 February 1958 granting to the petitioner extension of a permit for Datia-Nowgong route up to Chhatarpur was set aside. 2. While Hassanand Dharamsingh of Datia and Virbhandas Jasram of Satna, who had combined, held a permit for Datia-Nowgong route for three years commencing from 8-12-1956 the Nowgong Bus Association held another like permit. These two permit-holders applied to the Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior, for including the route Nowgong-Chhatarpur in the permits granted to them. The two applications were duly published and representations were invited against the proposed variation. One of the two objectors was the Bundelkhand Motor Transport Company, Nowgong (respondent 3), who urged that the applications c...
The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and anr. Vs. Singhai Moujilal ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP65; [1960(1)FLR532]; (1961)ILLJ275MP
Dixit, C.J.1. This is an appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the judgment of Bhutt, J. (as he then was) allowing Miscellaneous Petition No. 202 of 1957 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the respondent for the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ to set aside the order of the Government dated the 31st August 1957 directing the recovery of Rs. 2360.75 nP., as contribution from the respondent under the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petition was filed in the following circumstances.2. By a memorandum dated the 23rd March 1955, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Nagpur asked the respondent, a registered firm, to supply in pro forma certain information needed under the Act. In answer the respondent stated that the name of the factory was 'Simghai Moujilal and Sons' and the industry in which the factory was engaged was (a) manufacturing of metal goods and metal engraving, and (b)...
Pannalal Biraji Vs. Kalyanmal Nainchand and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP232
H.R. Krishan, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the unwilling tenant of a house from the judgment and decree against him for ejectment and arrears. The only material question at this stage is, whether the notice served on him before the suit was valid and in accordance with Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, because it might have terminated the tenancy on a date other than the one on which the lease term itself ended, even though more than 15 days had been given upto the last date of the lease term before the date of termination of the lease.2. The house had been taken on rent on a monthly basis on Kartik Sudi 1 Samvat 1997; but the rent note was actually executed eight days later on the Sudi 9th of the same month, the corresponding English dates being the 17th and the 25th. October, respectively. The relevant notice was dated 16th February, 1953, and was actually served on the tenant on 17th calling upon him to quit by the 30th of March, 'Chet amavas tak makan chhod dena'.The...
Laxminarayan Khemchand Vs. State Through Police
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP13; 1961CriLJ92; 1962MPLJ246
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. The applicant in revision has been convicted under Section 9(a) of the Indian Opium Act, as amended by the Madhya Bharat Act 15 of 1955 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a year and a half and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-with further rigorous imprisonment in default. This was for the possession without licence of about 4 seers of raw opium, by the applicant in his house and seized by a raiding party consisting of excise officers, police officers and two respectables (panchas) of the locality. The applicant set up a plea that the bag containing 4 seers, or to be more precise 3 seers and 14 chhataks opium, was openly taken into the house by a head constable, a member of the raiding party, and planted there. This was disbelieved both by the Magistrate and by the Sessions Court.2. The applicant has come here repealing the story of planting which is of course a plea of fact, and adding the following grounds of law (1) that the Madhya Bharat Act 15 of 19...
J.B. Mangaram and Co. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP96; [1960(1)FLR518]; (1961)ILLJ89MP
Dixit, C.J. 1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is by a partner of a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act which is engaged in the business of manufacture of biscuits and confectionary. 2. The petitioner's manufactory at Gwalior has been licensed under the Factories Act as a factory employing not more than five-hundred workers on any one day during the year. According to the applicant, the number of workers in the factory has never been less than 320 and at one time it went up to 477. The grievance of the petitioner is that during the pendency of certaindisputes raised by the firm and also by the union of the workers and referred to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for adjudication, the State Government issued a notification under Section 2(4) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, as adapted by the Madhya Bharat Industrial Relations (Adaptation) Act, Samvat 2006, applying all the provisio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »