Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Nathu Jeorakhan Vs. Sheopal Kuppa and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP47; 1963CriLJ184
ORDERS.P. Bhargava, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against: the order, dated 20-7-1961, passed by the Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, in Criminal Case No. 1554 of 1960.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that non-applicant No. 4, Smt Aghanr, was married to one Akhatram. On the allegation that non-applicants 2 and 3 got her remarried with the applicant Nathu, when the first marriage was subsisting, a criminal prosecution under Sections 494 and 494/114 of the Indian Penal Code was started by Shivpal (non-applicant No. 1) by filing a complaint in the Court of the Magistrate First Class, Biiaspur, against the applicant and the non-applicants 2, 3 and 4. Shivpal is the father of the said Akhatram. He had lodged the complaint with the leave of the Court on behalf of Akhatram the husband of Smt. Aghani, who was unable to make a complaint on account of his sickness. However, a few days after the filing of the complaint by Shivpal. Akhatram died. The applicant, therefore, ma...
Anandrao Laxmanrao Mandloi Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-1962
Reported in: AIR1965MP237; 1965MPLJ238
Newaskar, J.1. The question referred to the Full Bench is, whether it is competent for the Board of Revenue to revise an order passed by the Collector in exercise of his appellate powers under Section 28 of the Abolition of Jagirs Act. A Division Bench of this Court in Bondar v. Ganpat, 1960 MP LJ 1278 had taken the view that notwithstanding the provision in Section 28 referred to above the Collector's decision is open to revision by the Board of Revenue. This question again came up for consideration before the Division Bench consisting of myself and Krishnan, J. It was contended before us that although in the absence of any statutory provision the principle laid down in the case of National Telephone Co. Ltd. v. Post Master General, (1913) A. C. 546 and approved by the Supreme Court in AIR 1953 SC 357, National Sewing Thread Co. Ltd. v. James Chadwick and Bros., Ltd. will apply. Section 34 (2) of the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act clearly negatives such power of revision in the...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. J.P. Cassad and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-1962
Reported in: 1963CriLJ685; 1962MPLJ1084
Shiv Dayal, J.1.This is an appeal against acquittal of Respondent J.P. Cassed and D.M. Tembhekar who were tried along with Khan Sahib Haji Mulla Akbar All and Babusingh for the contravention of Rule 136 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956.,2. Khan Sahib Haji Mulla Akbar Ali is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Kalichhappar Colliery; J.P. Cassad is the Agent; Tembhekar is the Manager; and Babusingh the electrician.3. In connection with an enquiry into the electrocution of one Gudiya, Spare Pump Khalasi of the Mine, Mr. H.K. Bhattacharya, Inspector of Mines, inspected the electrical fittings in the bungalow of the Assistant Manager of the Mine. He found that neutral conductor of light circuits were taken through switches instead of taking these lines direct to lamps and that live lines were taken direct to the points instead of taking these lines through the switches, which resulted in contravention of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 32 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956. All the above...
Jamnadas Parashram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP106; 1963CriLJ433
Shrivastava, J.1. The Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad, has convicted Jamandas of the offence under Section 302, I. P. C., and sentenced him to death, 'holding him guilty of the murder of Mr. Raghuraman on July 12, 1961, in a running train between Bhopal and Itarsi. The trial Judge has made the reference (Criminal Reference No. 2 of 1962) for confirmation of the sentence, while Jamnadas has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 264 of 1962 from his conviction. Jamnadas was tried for the offence under Section 392, I. P. C. also but has been acquitted. The other accused, Shaukat, who was jointly tried with Jamnadas for offences under Sections 201 and 411, I. P. C., has been acquitted of both the charges. The State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 283 of 1962 for setting aside the acquittal of Jamnadas of the offence under Section 392, I. P. C., and also for setting aside the acquittal of Shaukat of the offences under Sections 201 and 411 I. P. C.2. Mr. Raghuraman, a young man of 25, was a...
Jagannath S/O. Rambux and ors. Vs. Bhilu S/O Kalu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP181
1. This second appeal involves only 8 question of limitation with reference to an execution application.2. The claim of the decree-holders-appellants in the present execution is held barred by limitation under Article 182 of the Limitation Act by both the Courts below and the appellants seek to assail those decisions. They had obtained a decree for money against the respondent in Civil Original Suit No. 56 of 1948 on 29-3-1948. Subsequent to this decree the respondent submitted an application for instalments under Section 15 of the Madhya Bharat Money Lenders Act on 5-1-1949. This application was dismissed on 15-7-1950. In the course of this petition for instalments an application was submitted on 15-7-1950 which contained a reference to the decree in execution, me present execution petition was filed on 29-10-1953 and it is not disputed that that is the only execution petition which has so far been filed. Reckoned from the date of the decree viz. 29-6-1948 this execution petition file...
Ramchndra S/O Deodutt Choubey and ors. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1962
Reported in: 1963CriLJ684
Shiv Dayal, J.1.This is an application under Section 526 Criminal Procedure Code, for transfer of Criminal Case No. 141 of 1961, pending in the Court of Shri R.S. Baipal, Magistrate, First Class, Baikunthpur.2. The only ground urged before me is that the collector, who is also the District Magistrate, is unduly interested in this case. It is said that there is a controversy Between different executive authorities as to the advisability of the prosecution. The petitioners say that they have an apprehension in their minds that the trial Magistrate, who is in a way subordinate to the District Magistrate, would be influenced by the latter.3. All that emerges from the material placed before me is that the opinion of the Revenue Authorities is a. variance with that of the Forest Department as to the advisability of this prosecution. That can hardly be a ground for transfer. No official, howsoever high he may be and whatever his attitude may be in his executive capacity, can influence a judic...
Narayandas Jawaharmal and ors. Vs. Vishnu Ganesh Namjoshi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP158; 1962MPLJ298
V.R. Newaskar, J. 1. This is an application under Section 152 or the Civil Procedure Code for amendment of the decree in Civil Second Appeal No. 4 of 1957 passed on 23-4-1959. The correction is sought on the ground of clerical error in the decree of the trial Court which has persisted in the decree in the aforesaid second appeal, in the decree of the trial court the date of the decision of the Rent Controller's court is mentioned to be 22-12-1953 factually it was not 22-12-1953 but it was 22-12-1952. This was not disputed. However the learned counsel for the opponent Mr. Saxena contends that the correction cannot now be made as the court should be taken to be functus officio by reason of the fact that the decree which is sought to be amended has been fully satisfied. He relies upon the decision, reported in Pitam Lal v. Balwant Singh, AIR 1925 All 556 and Munnuswami v. Hussain Khan Sahib, AIR 1926 Mad 516 in support of his contention.2. Mr. Chafekar, who appears for the applicant, howe...
Barnagar Electric Supply and Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya P ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP41
Dixit, C. J. In this case the petitioner, the Barnagar Electric Supply and Industrial Company Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the Company,) seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing an order of the State Government under Section 4(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), revoking its licence.2. The licence was granted to the Company under the Gwalior Electricity Act, Samvat 1995, on 28th March, 1938, by the Government of the former Gwalior State. The licence was for a period of twenty-five years and would have in ordinary course expired on 27th March, 1963. In January 1950 the Madhya Bharat Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (Adaptation Act), Samvat-2oo6 (No. 14 of 1950), came into force in Madhya Bharat. By that Act the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act were adapted and brought into force in Madhya Bharat. The repeal and saving clause of that Act inter alia made licences granted under the Gwalior Electricity Act as licences deemed to have been gra...
Abdul Alim Khan Abdul Aziz Vs. Sagarmal Bherajee
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1962
Reported in: AIR1963MP162; 1963CriLJ600
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an application by the Nawab of Jaora a ruling prince, who is the de facto complainant in a criminal case before the Magistrate, Jaora, (against one Sagarmal Mahajan) actually filed by his mukhtar-am or agent. The Nawab wanted to examine himself as a witness which is in his own interest. However, he simultaneously insisted that he was a 'privileged person' exempt as of right from personal attendance as a witness in a criminal Court, and should be examined on commission in the manner provided in Section 503 Criminal Procedure Code at his own residence. The learned Magistrate having heard both the parties, felt that on grounds of reasonableness and justice, there was no case for action under Section 503 Criminal Procedure Code; if the Nawab wanted to examine himself as a witness in support of his own complaint, he should come to the Court like any other witness. On the legal aspect of the matter the Magistrate felt that there was nothing in the law, that i...
Chaudhari Kanhaiyalal Keshrimalji and anr. Vs. Shankarprasadji Babu Ra ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-1962
Reported in: AIR1964MP259
ORDERP.V. Dixit, C.J.1. This is a petition to revise an order of the District Judge, Ujjain, directing the petitioners to pay ad valorem court-fees in a suit filed by them with the consent of the Advocate-General under Section 92, Civil Procedure Code.2. The petitioners are two in number. They claim to be the Shwetambar Murti-Poojak Jains and followers of Tapagachha group worshipping the idol of Shri Sheshphana Parshwanathji. In this capacity they have filed a suit in respect of an alleged public trust for religious and charitable purposes created by Premvijayaji Yeti by his will. That trust is said to relate to the temple of Shri Parshwanathji Sheshphana situated in Bansphod Gali, Ujjain. The three defendant-opponents, Sarvashri Shankarprasad, Bnan-varlal son of Gyanchand and Deepchand, are alleged to be the three surviving trustees appointed under the will executed by Premvijayaji. The fourth defendant-opponent Bhanvarlal son of Akheraj is alleged to have obtained certain trust prope...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »