Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh Vs. Nandlal Bhandari and So ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1962
Reported in: [1963]47ITR803(MP)
DIXIT C.J. - In this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh, Nagpur and Bhandara the question that the Appellate Tribunal has referred to us for opinion is :'Whether, having regard to the language of section 12, the provision of the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) could be applied in computing income assessable under section 12 Indian Income-tax Act ?'The matter arises thus. The assesses, Messrs. Nandlal Bhandari and sons, Indore, which us a private limited company was the owner of a property known as 'State Mill property'. It was leased out to Nandlal Bhandari Mills Ltd. on a rent of Rs. 17,0000 per annum. This rent income was assessed under section 12 of the Act and the assessee was allowed in the past allowances under sub-section (3) of section 12. This property was sold on 1st August, 1955. In the assessment year 1956-57, the Income-tax Officer assessed the prop lease rent up to to 31s...
Gayaprasad Vs. Burhanpur Tapti Mills Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1962
Reported in: (1962)IILLJ247MP
P.V. Dixit, C.J.1. This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for quashing a decision of the labour court, Indore, rejecting an application filed by the petitioner under Section 31 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act; for reinstatement on the ground that it was incompetent and the petitioner should have filed an application under Section 16 of the Central Provinces and Berar Industrial Disputes Settlement Act, 1947, be fore the appropriate authority. This Act was repealed by the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960, and will hereinafter be referred to as the repealed Act. The decision of the labour court was affirmed in revision by the Industrial court. A writ is also sought for quashing the decision of the industrial court.2. The petitioner was in the employment of the respondent 1, the Burhanpur Tapti Mills, Ltd., Burhanpur. He was dismissed from service on 4 November 1960 while the repealed Act ...
Ramlal Son of Pannalal and ors. Vs. Kanhaiyalal Son of Bholushah Porwa ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1962
Reported in: AIR1964MP285
ORDERV.R. Newaskar, J. 1. This appeal arises out of execution proceeding. Two questions are raised:1. That the Execution Petition No. 4 of 1960 in the course of which the order under appeal is passed is barred by limitation.2. That the Court below had erroneously applied the principle of constructive res judicata in negativing the plea of the judgment-debtor regarding limitation.Both these contentions raised in this appeal are without substance.2. As regards the question regarding limitation the point raised in the Court below was that there was no prior execution as against the appellants Ramlal, Laxman and Kanhaiyalal and relief is claimed against the appellants for the first time in the present execution petition in respect of the decree dated 140-1956 on 7-11-1960. This contention was factually incorrect as the prior execution case No. 5 of 1957 was against the appellants as is clear from the record of that execution petition before me. The objection regarding limitation was tried ...
Gulab Chand and ors. Vs. Krishna Biharilal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP22
Shiv Dayal, J.1. One Bulakichand had instituted a suit for declaration of title and possession in respect of certain properties situated in Sarafa Bazar, Lashkar. On the plaintiff's death his widow Pattobai was brought on record. She continued the suit. Eventually, a compromise was arrived at between the parties. Some properties were then transferred by Pattobai to Krishin Biharilal, father of her counsel, under three sale deeds. The present appeals arise out of two suits instituted by Ganeshilal and Laxmichand as reversioners challenging the alienation made by Pattobai in favour of Krishin Biharilal. At the request of the counsel for both sides both the appeals have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment.2. During the pendency of the reversioners' suit for setting aside the alienation and for declaration, that the alienation was not binding on them, Pattobai died in the year 1953 The defendants then raised an objection that me suit could not continue because it...
Gorelal S/O Munnalal Vs. Dropadibai W/O Gangaram and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP24
V.R. Newaskar, J.1. This is an employer's appeal against an award of compensation to the heirs of the deceased workman Gangaram under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The principal defence to the action were (i) that the deceased was not a workman within1 the definition of the term as given in Section 2(i)(n) of the Workmen's Compensation Act hereinafter called 'the Act', his employment being of a casual nature, and (ii) that the accident in the course of which he lost his life had not taken place in the course and arising out of his employment issue No. (1) was found against the appellant by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Act and on a finding that the deceased had been employed on daily wages of Rs. 5/-, the respondents were awarded Rs. 3,500/- as compensation.2. The facts were that the appellant was constructing his own house and had employed artisans and labourers for that purpose. Deceased Gangaram was one of them. It is admitted by the appellant that the deceased had w...
Firm Govind Hanumanprasad of UjjaIn Vs. Shamsingh S/O Sardar Lakhansin ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-1962
Reported in: AIR1962MP354
V.R. Newaskar, J.1. This appeal arises out of a proceedingstarted on a petition of a creditor Firm Govindram Hanumanprasad of Ujjain for securing adjudication of thedebtors Hemant Kumardas and Chittaranjan Rai as insolvents.2. The creditor firm was alleged to be entitled to a debt of Rs. 20,453/-. Certain acts of insolvency were attributed to the insolvents. After the filing of the application for the adjudication of insolvents the creditor moved under Section 21 of the insolvency Act for the attachment of the properties of the insolvents. Amongst the list of property sought to be attached there were National Savings Certificates of the denomination of Rs. 6,000/-. The Insolvency court by its order dated 314-1959 directed attachment of these certificates alleged to be standing in the name of the insolvents by issuing an order to the Superintendent Post Office Ujjain, Malwa Division, informing him that the same had been attached in the insolvency proceedings and directing him not to per...
Rameshwar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-1962
Reported in: AIR1962MP372; [1963(6)FLR61]; (1963)ILLJ792MP; 1962MPLJ717
K.L. Pandey, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's appeal against a reversing decree of the lower appeal Court by which his suit for declaration that his removal from service by an order dated 8 August 1957 is void and that, notwithstanding that order, he continues to hold the post of a Traffic Pointsman was dismissed. This judgment will also dispose of Second Appeal No. 347 of 1961, which is directed against a similar reversing decree of the lower appeal Court in a like suit filed in identical circumstances by one Badriprasati. 2. At the material time, Rameshwar Singh and Badriprasad were employed as confirmed Traffic Pointsman and served in the station yard at Bilaspur. In the course or their duties, they were utilized at times to perform the work of coupling and uncoupling of wagons. Their grievance was that this work of coupling and uncoupling of wagons was not a part of their duty and that, whenever they were required to do that work, they should have been paid acting allowance. On 16 March...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›