Madhya Pradesh Court February 1961 Judgments
Gitabai Kanhaiyalal and ors. Vs. Daulatrao Krishnarao and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1961
Reported in: AIR1962MP62
V.R. Newaskar, J.1. These two appeals arise out of execution proceedings under the following circumstances:2. One Daulatrao obtained a money decree on 31-10-47 against Pandurang. He had during the pendency of that suit obtained an order for attachment before judgment against Pandurang and in execution of that order got the houses alleged to belong to Pandurang attached including the house in question on 17-6-1947. After the decree was passed Daulatrao filed execution petition No. 29 of 1957 and got the house in dispute sold in Court auction and purchased it himself on 24-1-1959. He later obtained sale-certificate in respect of the said house on 9-5-1959. He then sought possession of the said house. This was resisted by the appellants Dhulibai, Gitabai. Gulabbai, Kisan and others on the ground that they had lawfully purchased the house from the judgment-debtor subsequent to the date of attachment before judgment. The decree-holder Daulatrao thereupon submitted an application to the exec...
Tag this Judgment!Tilakram Laluwa Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1961
Reported in: AIR1966MP154; 1965MPLJ982
Shrivastava, J.1. This first appeal by the plaintiff is against the dismissal of his suit by the Additional Civil Judge First Class, Raipur.2. The plaintiff was employed as a Kamdar in the Agriculture Department. He was suspended on 14-11-1946 with effect from 1-11-1946. On 13-3-1948, an order was passed dismissing him from service with effect from 16-12-1948 (sic), A sum of Rs. 853/-/9 was paid by him on 29-10-1946 for shortage in recoveries made by him. After his dismissal, a challan was put up against him on 15-2-1948 that he had misappropriated Government cash. This criminal case was withdrawn on 15-10-1954 by the State and consequently an order of acquittal was passed. The appellant filed the present suit on 1-12-1955.3. The plaintiff's case is that he was dismissed from service without any departmental enquiry, contrary to the provisions in Section 240(3) of the Government of India Act. Consequently, the dismissal was wrongful and ineffective. He further stated that the dismissal...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanlal Harprasad, a Firm and ors. Vs. Firm Lal Mohammad, a Partnersh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1961
Reported in: AIR1962MP297
P.K. Tare, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Misc. (First) Appeal No. 146 of i960 (Firm Lal Mohammad, a registered firm through partners v. Mohanlal Harprasad a registered firm through partners).2. The present appeal is by the plaintiff against the order, dated, 9-8-1960, passed by Shri S. M. Pagnis, District Judge, Hoshangabad in Civil Suit No. 7-A of 1959, granting, a temporary injunction to the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code on certain terms. The plaintiff in the present appeal questions the imposition of the terms. The term imposed was that the plaintiff should undertake and bind itself in writing that in case it fails in the suit, it will pay to the defendant for each of the two labels E and G, one-twelfth of the total net profits learned by it in its bidi business during the continuance of this injunction and for this purpose, the plaintiff was. directed to keep regular, complete and correct accounts of its business.3. The connected ap...
Tag this Judgment!Ballabh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1961
Reported in: AIR1961MP274
Dixit, C.J. 1. I agree with the construction that has been put on Sections 15 (1) and 22 (2) of the C. P. and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, by my learned brother Shrivastava, J. I would only add a few observations on the decisions in Bikulal v. State of M.P., ILR (1953) Nag 245 : (AIR 1953 Nag 125) and K. C. Shanna v. Ramgulam Choubey, ILR (1954) Nag 571 : (AIR 1954 Nag 255). Bhikulal's Case ILR (1953) Nag 245 : (AIR 1953 Nag 125) dealt with the question of the president of a municipal committee incurring a disqualification under Section 15 (1) read with Section 22 (2) because of the vice-president of the municipal committee purchasing cloth from a shop belonging to the president It was held on the basis of Tranton v. Astor (1917) 33 TLR 383, that such a purchase transaction did not amount to a contract entailing a disqualification as contemplated by Section 15 (1) of the Act. In the other case the question that was considered was whether a person was eligible lor election as preside...
Tag this Judgment!Nandkishore Jugalkishore Vs. Commissioner, Jabalpur Division and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-1961
Reported in: AIR1962MP15
Pandey, J. 1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against an order dated 4 June 1960, by which the Commissioner, Jabal-pur Division (respondent 1) found the petitioner, clerk in the District Office, Jabalpur guilty of (i) misappropriating a sum of Rs. 33/- and (ii) fraudulently drawing that sum again for payment of a bilt and dismissed him from service.2. On 10 February 1959, a charge-sheet together with the statement of allegations and a forwarding memorandum directing the holding of a departmental enquiry, all signed by the Collector, Jabalpur (respondent 2), were served on the petitioner and he was directed to submit his reply to the two charges within seven days to the enquiring officer, R.C. Shrivastava. On 16 February 1959, the petitioner applied for copies of certain documents (Annexure O. The enquiring officer however directed, perhaps in order to save time, that the petitioner should be allowed to inspect the documents. It would appear that...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Committee Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1961
Reported in: AIR1962MP40
Dixit, C.J.1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Municipal Committee, Senoi, asks far a writ of certiorari to bring up and quash an order of the Collector, Seoni, made on 5th March, 1960, staying the public auction of municipal Kothas and Chabutras and for a writ of prohibition to the Collector, Seoni, and the opponent State restraining them from giving effect to the said order of the Collector.2. The facts and circumstances in which this petition has been filed are that on 1st February,1960, the Municipal Committee issued a public proclamation stating that the Kothas and Chabutras located in market sites would be leased out for the period from 1st April, 1960 to 31st March,1961, by public auction on 24th February 1960. The proclamation directed all defaulters to clear off their arrears of taxes and rent by 23rd February, 1960, adding that on their failure to do so they would not be permitted to bid at the auction.Subsequently, another proclamation ...
Tag this Judgment!Pyarelal Sharma Vs. University of Sagar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1961
Reported in: AIR1961MP356
Dixtt, C.J.1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing a decision of the University of Sagar cancelling the result of the Previous LLB. Examination taken by the applicant in May 1960 and debarring him from appearing at any supplementary examination of 1960, or at the examination to be held in 1961. The applicant also prays that the opponents be restrained from giving effect to that decision which was notified by the University on 24th August 1960 (Annexure, VI).2. The matter arises thus. The petitioner presented himself as an examinee at the Previous LL.B. Examination of the University at the Raipur centre. The examination was held in May 1960. The results of the examination were declared on 18th July 1960. The petitioner was one of those declared as successful in the examination. It appears that on or about the 9th of May 1960 some person addressed a communication to the Registrar of the Univer...
Tag this Judgment!New Jabalpur Transport (Private) Ltd. Vs. State Transport Appellate Au ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1961
Reported in: AIR1961MP367
Pandey, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against several orders passed by the Transport Authorities constituted under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, which, for brevity, would hereinafter be called the Act.2. By an order dated 25 March 1953 (Annexure III), the Regional Transport Authority, Raipur (respondent 2), rejected the petitioner's objections and granted to the Raipur Transport Co. (Private) Ltd. (respondent 4) a stage carriage permit for service between Raipur and Mandla with a direction that the timings would be regulated by the Secretary-Member separately. This grant was made on the respondent 4 undertaking to surrender its alternate day stage carriage permit for service on a part of the route, namely, Kawardha to Mandla.It appears that the alternate day permit was subsequently surrendered. By an order dated 28 March 1958, the Regional Transport Authority, Jabalpur (respondent 3) granted to the petitioner a stage carriage permit for s...
Tag this Judgment!Shyamsingh Jaswantsingh Vs. Pralhadsingh Tikaram and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-1961
Reported in: AIR1962MP66
Dixit, C.J.This Letters Patent appeal by the plaintiff from a decision of Shrivastava, J. arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale of certain lands and for damages in the alternative. The suit was dismissed by the Civil Judge, Second Class, Hoshangabad, who tried, it. In appeal the learned Additional District Judge of Hoshangabad gave to the plaintiff a decree for specific performance of the contract. The defendant-respondents thereupon preferred a second appeal in this Court which was allowed by the learned Single Judge and the plaintiffs claim for specific performance of the contract was dismissed. The learned Single Judge, however, gave to the plaintiff a decree for Rs. 600/- as damages against the respondent Pralhad Singh.2. Briefly stated, the plaintiffs case was that on 8th/9th April 1951 the respondent Pralhad-singh entered into an oral agreement with him for sale of the suit lands for Rs. 2700/-; that on 28th April 1951 he gave to Pralhadsingh wheat ...
Tag this Judgment!Motandas and ors. Vs. Gopaldas Basarmal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-1961
Reported in: AIR1962MP307; 1962MPLJ790
ORDERS.B. Sen, J. 1. The findings which are not challenged in this revision are as follows. The house in suit is an evacuee property. It was purchased by the plaintiffs in auction held by the Custodian of Evacuee Property. The auction took place on 13-7-57 and the sale certificate was issued on 25-7-59. The defendant is a displaced person and is also entitled to the benefit of Section 29 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act of 1954. 2. The point in dispute is whether the period of two years up to which the defendant is liable to remain in the house in question starts from the date of auction i.e. from 13-7-57 or from the date on which the sale certificate is issued i.e. on 25-7-59. The trial court has held that it starts from 25-7-59, hence this revision has been filed by the plaintiffs. 3. The applicant relied on Section 65 of the C. P. Code which says that after the sale has become absolute the property is deemed to have vested in the purchaser on the date o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›