Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
Juggankhan Jamshankhan Vs. State, Through Police Shujalpur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-10-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP102; 1963CriLJ296
KRISHNAN, J. 1. The appellant, aged about 55 years, and registered as 3 homoeopathic medical practitioner at the relevant time at the Akodia Mandi in the Dist of Shajapur, has been. convicted by the learned Sessions, Judge Shajapur under Section 302, 1. P. C., for the murder of Deobai, wife of Gopal Rajput, aged about 20 years, by administering to her a quantity of extract of stramonium (Dhatura), and also a full leaf of the same plant, knowing or having reason to know that the leaf as well as the extract are extremely poisonons, and in the manner and quantities administered, certain to cause death of the patient, and not indicated in any recognized system and certainly not in homoeopathy as the proper medicine for the disease that he was ostensibly treating, namely, 'naru' or guinea-worm.2. In the lower Court as well as here, the questions were the following. On the facts whether he didgive the patient either the fresh leaves or the extract of stramonium or both, and not merely what h...
Baburao Vs. Mst. Sushila Bai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-1962
Reported in: AIR1964MP73; 1963MPLJ426
Bhargava, J.1. This appeal from the decision, of the Additional District Judge, Chhindwara dated 11-4-1961 has been filed by the husband, whose petition for restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent has been rejected. Another appeal (Miscellaneous (first) Appeal No. 26 of 1961) has been. filed by him against the order awarding interim maintenance at the rats of Rs. 25/- per month and for costs amounting to Rs 100/- to the respondent for defending the petition under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called the Act) on 30-1-1961. Both these appeals will be disposed of by this judgment2. In his petition, the appellant had stated that he was married to the respondent on 26-4-1955; that the respondent lived happily with the appellant for about a year and half at Chhindwara; that the appellant then asked the respondent to accompany him to live at Ramtek but she refused and the appellant went alone to Ramtek; that he himself came to take respondent on some occasion...
Tulsa W/O Pannalal Koli Vs. Pannalal Natha Koli and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP5; 1962MPLJ987
Shiv Dayal, J.1.This is an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act from a decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed in favour of the husband.2. In his petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. Pannalal alleged that he was married to Tulsa in or about 1953. She gave birth to a daughter in 1957, but the girl did not survive for more than two days. Tulsa's father took herto his house for Diwali festival but thereafter she did not return.3. Tulsa resisted the petition on the groundthat in fact the plaintiff deserted her and he treated, her with cruelty.4. The learned Additional District Judge Gwalior, who tried the petition found that the plaintiff did not desert her nor did he treat her with cruelty. In the result he passed a decree in favour of the husband.5. Shri Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellant, invites our attention to Pannalal's stater ment. There he says that one day she requested him to escort her to her father's house and gave him to under...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Raja Balbhadra Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-03-1962
Reported in: AIR1964MP231; 1964MPLJ527
Shiv Dayal, J.1. This is an appeal from a decree passed against the State Government for the recovery of Rs. 22,141/11/5 in favour of the respondent. The plaintiff was the Jagirdar of Rajhogarh. The Jagir vested in the State of Madhya Bharat on December 4, 1952, by virtue of the M. B. Abolition of Jagir Act, 1952. The plaintiff was entitled to recover Rs. 19843/12/- on account of excise duty on liquor and Rs. 5,678/13/- on account of Ganja, Bhang and opium; total Rs. 24,622/- which had been realised by the State Government on behalf of the Jagirdar for the period between 1-4-49 and 31-3-51. There is no dispute that this amount was clue to the plaintiff from the State Government. The defendant resisted the claim on the sole ground that he was not liable to pay that sum because the Government had already adjusted the sum of Rs. 20,415/11/5 which was payable by the plaintiff to it. The balance of Rs. 4206/13/7 thus remaining due to the plaintiff had already been deposited in the treasury ...
Mahadulal and anr. Vs. Chironji Lal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP51; 1962MPLJ1102
A.H. Khan, J. 1. This is plaintiff's first appeal from the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Shivpuri, in case No. 4 of 1952, Original Civil, dismissing the plaintiff's claim for the recovery of Rs. 13527-11-6.2. The plaintiffs are the owners of a firm known as Firm Seth Tiparchand Hiralal, while the defendants are owners of another Firm, known as Firm Thakurdas Gopilal.3. The plaintiff's case is that the owners of the defendant-firm on 11-3-34, after going through the accounts of the plaintiff-firm admitted a sum. of Rs. 12491/- due to the plaintiffs and in acknowledgment of the debt signed an entry in the plaintiff's Bahi-Khata. Out of this, a sum of Rs. 3697-10-9 has been realised, and, the present suit is for the recovery of the balance (Rs. 8793-5-3) and interest thereon at 9 per cent per annum.4. The defendants admitted signing the Bahi-Khata. But the main ground on which they resisted the suit was that subsequent to the signing of the Bahi-Khata, an agreement...
Mahakoshal Transport Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. Regional Transport ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP274; 1962MPLJ214
Shrivastava, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Mahakoshal Transport Co-operative Society Ltd., Raipur (through its President) against the Regional Transport Authority, Raipur (respondent No. 1), Raipur Transport Company (Private) Ltd., Raipur (respondent No. 2) and Anand Transport Company (Private) Ltd., Raipur (respondent No. 3) for a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Regional Transport Authority, Raipur, dated 30-11-1961, refusing to grant the petitioner a temporary stage carriage permit for four months under Section 62 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The petitioner has entered into a contract with the Railway Authorities to carry passengers from Raipur to Kawardha and jagdalpur as a consequence of the Railway opening out-agencies in Kawardha and Jagdalpur. According to the petitioner respondents 2 and 3 had also, applied for the contract; but as the tender of the petitio...
Firm Dayalal Meghji and Co. and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1962MP342; [1962(5)FLR478]
Dixit, C.J.1.This order will also govern Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 227 242, 243 and 297, all of 1961. 2. In these five cases under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners, challenge the vires of the Minimum Wages (Madhya Pradesh Amendment and Validation) Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Validation Act), and seek a declaration that the said Act is constitutionally invalid, ultra vires and unenforceable, and pray that a suitable direction be issued to the opponents for bearing them from giving effect to the Validation Act in any manner whatsoever. 3. The matter arises thus. In the former State of Madhya Pradesh, which comprised the Mahakoshal region of the new State of Madhya Pradesh, the minimum wages for the workers in concerns owned by the petitioners were first fixed in 1951 by notifications issued in 1951. These rates were revised in 1956 and 1957. After the formation of the new State of Madhya Pradesh, the Government constituted under Sections 5 and 6 of the M...
Battulal Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC893(MP)
K.L. Pandey, J.1. The questions of law formulated for our opinion in this reference at the instance of the dealer under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, are:(i) Whether the word 'period' in Section 11(5) of the Act means the period during which an unregistered dealer was liable to .pay tax and during which he wilfully failed to apply for registration, as interpreted by this Board or any specific interval of time ?(ii) Whether any part of the assessment made by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer under his order of 2nd June, 1955, is barred by limitation ?2. The facts giving rise to this petition may be briefly stated. The petitioner, who is a dealer, did not get himself registered under the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), though he was liable to pay tax thereunder. On 26th June, 1950, a notice under Section 11(5) of the Act in Form XII for the period 1st June, 1947, to 26th June, 1950, was issued to the dealer an...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›