Madhya Pradesh Court February 1962 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.
Gokul Prasad Moujilal Bharat Vs. Laxmansingh Mahasingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1962
Reported in: AIR1962MP265
Dixit, C.J. 1. This matter comes up on a reference by a Division Bench of this Court and the question that has been referred to the Full Bench for decision is:-'Whether a challenge to the validity of the election of the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the, respondent, the Co-operative Central and Land Mortgage Bank Ltd., is a dispute falling under bye-law 52 of the bye-laws framed by the Bank?''2. At a meeting of the Board of Directors of the Bilaspur Co-operative, Central and Land Mortgage Bank Ltd., held on 19th May 1951, the respondent No. 2 Kesheorao Goverdhan was elected as Chairman of the Board. Thereupon the respondent No. 1. Laxmansingh, who was defeated at the election, filed an application under Rule 26 of the Rules made by the Local Government under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, challenging the validity of the election of Keshorao as the Chairman and claiming a declaration about his own election as chairman. The Registrar acting under Rule 27 referred the elect...
Kalu Ram Pannalal and anr. Vs. V. Jagannath Kalua
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP151
ORDERP.R. Sharma, J.1. This revision application has been preferred by the plaintiff, whose suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 489/9/- on the basis of a bond has been dismissed by both lower Courts.2. It was alleged in the plaint that the respondent took a cash loan of Rs. 410/- on 15-11-1953 agreeing to repay the loan by instalments of Rs. 10/- per month with interest at 12% per annum. The defendant repaid only a sum of Rs. 50/-. The plaintiff, therefore, claimed Rs. 360/- as principal, Rs. 129/- by way of interest and annas -/9/- as notice charges.3. The suit was originally Instituted in the name of firm 'Kaluram Chhotelal'. Thereafter by an amendment of the plaint the names of Kaluram and Chhotelal as proprietors of the firm 'Kaluram Chhotelal' were substituted as plaintiffs in place of the firm. The plaintiffs signed the amended plaint on 30-9-1959.4. The trial Court held that the suit was barred by Section 22 of the Limitation Act. This finding was, however, set aside on appeal by ...
Onkar Bahadur Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP174; 1963MPLJ136
Golvalkar, J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff whose suit for return of certain logs of wood or its value has been dismissed on two preliminary grounds; firstly that the suit was premature and secondly because the defendant-State was not liable to the plaintiff.2. It is the case of plaintiff that he had cut the logs from a village forest and action against him for breach of rules framed under Section 202 of the Land Revenue Act in the matter of that cutting was taken, and he was fined in addition to the confiscation of the timber. However, the Board of Revenue set aside both the orders, imposing fine and confiscation of the timber, and the revenue officer was directed to return the wood to the person from whose possession it was seized. The plaintiff averred that nothing was done to return the timber to him and ultimately he had to serve a notice under Section 80, Civil Procedure Code, proposing to file a suit either to obtain the timber or its price from the defendant.3. The defe...
Ramkripal Sheoprasad and ors. Vs. Municipal Committee
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-09-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP240; 1963MPLJ261
Shrivastava, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants in Civil Suit No. 7-B of 1957, which was instituted by the respondent Municipal Committee, Bilaspur, for recovery of amount due on the basis of a contract. The claim was decreed by the trial Court in full.2. The following facts are not in dispute.The respondent Municipal Committee had imposed fees on the sale of cattle in Bilaspur at the rate of three pies per rupee on the sale price of such cattle. The right to realise these fees was sold by auction and appellant No. 1 Ramkripal offered a bid of Rs. 50,050/- which was accepted. The contract was duly reduced into writing and appellant No. 1 thus became entitled to realise the fees for the period 1-4-1954 to 31-3-1955. The other appellants stood sureties for appellant No. 1 for payment of the amount due under the contract. Appellant No. 1 paid a sum of Rs. 12,512/- at the time of the auction. He further paid a sum of Rs. 7,299-4-0 till 23-8-1954. The amount under the contract was to ...
Sheoraj Singh and anr. Vs. Mst. Munia Wife of Sheosaran Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP360; 1963MPLJ540
Pandey, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against a reversing order of the Board of Revenue dated 15 September 1961 by which a moiety of the compensation payable under the Vindhya Pradesh Abolition of Jagirs and Land Reforms Act, 1952, in respect or four Pawai villages was directed to be paid to Msf. Munia (respondent 1).2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated.One Sawailal Singh and his two sons, Harisharan Singh and Shivsharan Singh, who were governed by the Mitaskshara law, jointly held a heritable Pawai consisting of six villages. Sawailal Singh died long ago, leaving behind his two sons. Shivsharan Singh died in 1946 (according to the petitioners, in 1939) survived by his widow, Mst Munia (respondent 1). The Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937 (18 of 1937), was extended to Vindhya Pradesh in 1990. Thereafter, Harisharan Singh died leaving behind him two sons, the present petitioners. Upon the commencement of the Vindhya Prad...
Rameshwar HarnaraIn and anr. Vs. Smt. Bhagwatibai Ramkishan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1962
Reported in: AIR1962MP384; 1962MPLJ280
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an application by the defendant in a pending suit, where the plaintiff wants to adduce in evidence a document executed by the defendant, creating against him a liability for Rupees 2,000/-. The defence in this regard is that this is a promissory note, not having been properly stamped and as such not admissible into evidence in any event oven after impounding or validation after taxation and realisation of penalty by the Collector. The plaintiff's position is that this was not a pro-note, but a receipt which should be admitted after the payment of penalty. Hearing this as a preliminary issue that court found that the document was a receipt and therefore admissible into evidence. 2. Unlike problems relating to the merits of the suit, the admission of any document into evidence after considering the sufficiency or otherwise of the stamps is final. No superior court can reinvestigate the matter in appeal or revision. Section 36 of the Stamp Act runs : 'Whet...
N.P. Srivastaya Vs. Dr. Hari Vinayak Pataskar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1962MP221
Dixit, C.J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, for the issue of a writ of mandamus to the Chancellor of the Jabalpur University directing him to call upon the Executive Council of the University to elect two persona for being members of a committee to be constituted under Section 11 (2) of the Jabalpur University Act, 1956.2. The controversy in the case is as to the legality of the direction issued by the Chancellor in November, 1961, to the Executive Council to elect one person to sit on the Committee in place of Shri Shriman Narayan. What has given rise to the contest is that some few months before the term of Shri Kunjilal Dubey as Vice-Chancellor was due to expire, the Chancellor called upon the Executive Council to choose its nominees under Section 11 (2) of the Act. This was on 3.1st January, 1961. Pursuant to this direction of the Chancellor, the Executive Council appointed Shri Shriman Narayan and Dr. Parija, Vice-chancellor of the Utkal University...
Union of India (Uoi), Represented by General Manager, Central Rly. Vs. ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1962MP374; 1962MPLJ193
ORDERP.K. Tare, J.1. This revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Couse Courts Act is by the defendant against the decree, dated, 20-9-1961, passed by Shri P. B. Thakre, Additional District Judge, East Nimar, Khandwa, empowered (under Section 9 of the M. P. Civil Courts Act, 1958, in Small Cause Suit No. 167 of 1961.2. The respondent was a consignee of a consignment booked from Wadi on 18-3-1960. The station of destination was Khandwa. The goods reached Khandwa on 24-3-1960 when a consignment consisting of stones was devered to the respondent in a damaged condition. 3. The respondent filed the present suit claiming Rs. 370.17 nP. as damages for the loss caused on account of the alleged negligence on the part of the Railway Administration. In the plaint it was alleged that a notice under Section 77 of the Railways Act had been served on the Railway Administration. However, the date of the notice was not mentioned. Further on, it was also mentioned that a copy of the notice, da...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›