Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Hitkarini Sabha Vs. Corporation of the City and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP324
Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the Hitkarini Sabha, Jabalpur, against the order of the 2nd Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, dated 14-9-1957, on a reference made by the Collector, Jabalpur, under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), Another appeal (Misc. Appeal No. 16 of 1958) arising out of the same proceedings has been filed by the Corporation of the City of Jabalpur. Both these appeals are disposed of by this order.2. Plots Nos. 670, 671 and 735, situate inMadan Mahal Extension Area, Jabalpur, were acquired by the State Government under the Act forconstructing the Home Science College. PlotsNos. 670 and 671 were partly occupied by structures. A notification under Section 4 of the Actwas issued on 2-3-1955 with respect to the vacantplot. Along with this notification, another notification under Section 17(4) was also issued stating that the site was urgently needed and therefore the provisions of Section 5A were dispense...
The Nimar Cotton Press Through Proprietor, Nareman Sorabji Kerawala Vs ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP88; [1961]12STC313(MP)
Dixit, C.J. 1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing an order of assessment of the Sales Tax Officer, Khandwa, imposing on him sales-tax of Rs. 1291-3-0 and a penalty of Rs. 800/- for his failure to apply for registration under the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947. The assessment was made in the following circumstances. 2. The petitioner is the proprietor of a cotton pressing concern at Khandwa. The business of the concern consists in pressing and baling ginned cotton supplied by merchants. The cotton is delivered by the petitioner to his clients in bales covered with hessian cloth and secured by iron hoops. The petitioner charged an inclusive rate for pressing and for packing. The Sales Tax Officer held that the applicant was liable to pay sales-tax on the value of hessian cloth and iron hoops used in the baling process and accordingly made an assessment of sales-tax for the period fron...
Kartarsingh Narainsingh and anr. Vs. Lallusingh Padamsingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-1960
Reported in: AIR1962MP104
ORDERP.R. Sharma, J.1. The only question which arises for consideration in this revision application is whether a Magistrate can order attachment of the property in dispute under the 3rd proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 145, Cri. P, C. before the preliminary order passed under Sub-section (1) of Section 145, Cri. P.C. has been served on the opposite party. 2. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the applicants on the case of Sri Ram v. State, AIR 1958 Punj 47. That was a case in which the learned Judge who decided it had come to the conclusion that no preliminary order had in fact been passed by the Magistrate concerned. No doubt the learned Judge further held that even on the assumption that the order dated 25-5-1956 is a preliminary order under Sub-section (1) of Section 145, Cri. P. C., the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to issue an order of attachment prior to its service on the opposite party. The observations of the learned Judge on this point are clearly obit...
inderam Mansaram and anr. Vs. RamdIn Bhagwant Prasad and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP200
P.K. Tare, J. 1. This appeal is by the decree-holders against the order, D/- 16-12-1939 passed by Shri S. M. Afzal, Additional District Judge. Durg, in Miscellanous Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1959, reversing the order, D/- 31-7-1959, passed by Shri J. D. Shrivastava, Civil Judge, Class II, Bemetara, in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 45 of 1958.2. One Bhagwatiprasad, since deceased (who was defendant 4 in the Civil Suit) mortgaged with the original fifth defendant, Ramjilal and his brother, Rainkrishna, his. 4 annas share in village Andhiyarkhor on 15-10-1923, The whole of the Village share relating to four annas interest excluding cultivating rights in sir lands was the subject-matter of the mortgage for a consideration of Rs. 3000/- in favour of Ramjilal and his brother, Ram'krishna. On the basis of the deed, the mortgagees obtained a decree for foreclosure in Civil Suit No. 75 of 1930.The decree-holders were in possession of the foreclosed property till they sold the same to the present ...
Gorilal Baldeodas Vs. Ramjeelal Bhuralal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP346
H.R. Krishnan, J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from the judgment of the first appellate Court reversing the decision of the trial Court allowing the plaintiff's suit for the principal of a loan of Rs. 1000/-and interest at a rate lower than the one claimed. The appellate Court held that the suit of the plaintiff was time-barred; because the payment by a cheque in the handwriting of the borrower, is not an acknowledgement for the purposes of Section 20 of the Limitation Act, and does not give a fresh term of limitation, unless the cheque is honoured and the money is realised. As in this case the cheque concerned was not honoured, limitation was not saved under Section 20 and the plaintiff's suit stood time-barred. The appellate Court did not consider whether the plaintiff could have been granted any relief on the fact of the cheque itself being dishonoured; the plaintiff himself had not made that prayer in so many words.2. The facts of the case are the following: It is common g...
Rikhiram Bhagwandas Vs. Ramlal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP169
ORDERP.K. Tare, J.1. This revision under Section 115, of the Civil Procedure Code is by the plaintiff against the order, dated 5-5-1960, passed by Shri R.S. Agarwala, District Judge, Durg at Rajnandgaon, in Civil Appeal No. 6-B of 1959, arising out of the decree, dated 12-2-1959, passed by Shri N.M. Jinsiwale, Civil Judge, Class I, Rajnandgoan, in Civil Suit No. 31-B of 1957.2. The non-applicants filed a suit for damages for breach of contract, claiming an amount of Rs. 2300/- towards the same. They were to act as commission agents of the applicant. The applicant alleged that he had instructed the non-applicants to purchase grain and they had done it as per contract, dated 13-5-1957. The applicant had also confirmed the order by his telegram, dated 13-5-1957. The non-applicants had also made a counter claim, alleging that the applicant was guilty of a breach. The learned Judge of the trial Court decreed the plaintiff's claim in full and dismissed the defendants' counter claim, holding ...
RamnaraIn Damodrilal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1963MP35
Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal arises out of a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) decided by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Bhopal, on 6-2-1958.2. The Municipal Board, Bhopal, found it necessary to widen a road situate in Sarafa Bazar, Bhopal town, and requested the Collector, Bhopal, to acquire 54 sq. ft of land belonging to the appellant and 9sq.ft. of land belonging to one Iqbal Hussain. Notifications under sections 4 and 6 of the Act were issued in 1954 and the parties filed their claims before the Land Acquisition Officer. The appellant claimed Rs. 12,000/- for his 54 sq.ft. bf land and Iqbal Hussain claimed Rs. 13040/- for his 9 sq.ft. The Collector gave his award on 25-6-1955 fixing Rs. 350/- and Rs. 26/- as compensation payable to them. Both of. them requested the Collector to make a reference to the 'Court and this was done by the Collector. Before the Court, the appellant claimed Rs. 8640/- only on the basis of the f...
Ashalata D/O Baboolal Vs. M.B. Vikram University and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1961MP299
Krishnan, J. 1. This is an application of an unusual nature even by the standards of those under Article 226 of the Constitution. This year, the two text booksprescribed for general English for the B.Sc. Part IExamination of the Vikram University have been changed; in other words, those for the examination of 1961 are different from those in 1960. The petitioner is a student who had failed in the B.Sc. Part I Examination of 1960 and is preparing to appear for the examination in 1961. She has already studied these two old books and feels that the change has put her 'to financial loss and exposed her to extra strain'.Accordingly, she challenges this change, which under the law is made on the recommendation of the Board of Studies constituted by the University; according to her, this change is legally invalid, because the Board at the meeting of the 4th February, 1960, did not have a chairman nominated by the Vice Chancellor, but elected ad hoc, one of its own members for that office.It i...
Gulmohammad S/O Khudabux and ors. Vs. Viniyabai W/O Siddhanath and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1963MP9
A.H. Khan, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order under Section 151, C. P. C. passed under the Lunacy Act. No appeal lies against an order passed by a court under its inherent powers. The proper remedy is to file a revision. We reject the appeal. This, as suggested by my learned brother should be treated as a revision.Shiv Dayal, J.2. This appeal has been preferred from an interlocutory order passed by the Additional District Judge Shajapur in case No. 260 (Lunacy)whereby he has directed stay of all other suits and proceedings in which Siddhnath is a party.3. Biniyabai respondent No. 1 is the wife of Siddhnath; Babu (Resp. No. 2) is their son and Shyama Bai (Respondent No. 3) their daughter. These three respondents, it is said before us, have instituted proceedings under sections 62 and 63 of the Lunacy Act in the said Court alleging Siddhnath to be a lunatic. They also urged that certain suits and proceedings were pending in different courtswhere the question of Siddhnath's lunacy a...
Anup Prabha Bai Sethi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, M. P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1960
Reported in: [1962]44ITR237(MP)
DIXIT C.J. - This is a reference under section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act and the question raised by the Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, is whether the concession granted under paragraph 12 of the Part B States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1950, applies also in respect of super-tax.The facts, shortly, are that in the course of the proceedings for assessment of the tax for the year 1950-51 the assessee, Shrimati Anup Prabha Bai, made no disclosure of any dividends received by her from the Binod Mills Ltd., Ujjain, a company registered in a Part B State, to wit, Madhya Bharat, on the ground that these dividends were exempt from income-tax as well as super-tax under paragraph 12 of the Taxation Concessions Order, 1950. The assessee is an individual and was a resident of Indore in a Part B State in the previous year. The Income-tax Officer gave the concession under paragraph 12 in respect of income-tax only. He negatived the claim as regards super-tax. The decision of the Income-tax Officer...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »