Madhya Pradesh Court August 1963 Judgments
Lalchand Devandas and ors. Vs. the Food Inspector and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1963
Reported in: 1966CriLJ1092
ORDERH.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an application in revision from the concurrent decisions of the lower Courts convicting the three applicants under Sections 7 and 16(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentencing each of them to a fine of Rs. 1000 with imprisonment in default. The applicants Nos. 1 and 2, who are father and son, are the owners of shop selling food-grains and ghee, inter alia, while applicant No. 3, who is also a son of Devandas, has 'been described as a servant of the shop. Actually, he is the person who sold one quarter seer of ghee properly socalled to the Food Inspector, Dr. Trivedi, on the 6th October, 1980 which on analysis was found to be below the standard and, as the data show, very much below the standard prescribed for ghee. Accordingly, he and the owners were prosecuted and convicted. The defence on facts was that the shop had been licensed to sell only what is called vegetable ghee and not ghee properly so called. The Food Inspector, however, ...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Prasad Choubey Vs. Smt. Prabhadevi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-09-1963
Reported in: AIR1964MP28
Shiv Dayal, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal from the dismissal of his suit which he filed under Section 10 of the Hindu Mamage Act, 1955, for a decree for judicial separation against the respondent.2. The appellant aged 32 years, is a lecturer in the Government Higher Secondary School, Sihora. Prabha Devi (respondent), aged 26 years, was married to him in May 1955 and the consummation ceremony (Gouna) took place in January, 1956. The couple lived at Sagar for about four months from January to April 1956, where after she went to her parents' house and returnedafter two months. She remained with her husband for another five months from July to November 1956. The contentions in the plaint were that the defendant quarrelled and disobeyed the plaintiff's mother whom he held in great esteem because she had brought him up after much sacrifice in adverse circumstances. The plaintiff reprimanded the defendant. She abused him and 'misbehaved' and threatened to poison him. Thereafter, she onc...
Tag this Judgment!Kalooram Tirasilal Vs. the Income-tax Officer, c Ward
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-09-1963
Reported in: AIR1965MP148; [1966]59ITR308(MP); 1965MPLJ403
Dixit, C.J.1. By this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners seek a writ of certiorari for quashing an order made by the Income-tax Officer, C-Ward, Jabalpur, on 28th March, 1962, under Section 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, rectifying an error in the assessment made against the petitioners for the assessment year 1956-57.2. The matter arises thus : In the course of assessment proceedings with respect to the assessment, year 1956-57, the Income-tax Officer noticed an item of Rs. 44,659 as cash credit in the capital account of the petitioner-assessee. When asked to explain this item, the assessee said that they were sale proceeds of 508 tolas of gold and gold-ornaments belonging to the family. The Income-tax Officer was not satisfied with this explanation. Me took the view that having regard to the financial condition of the assessee, the accumulation or possession of so much gold as to yield Rs. 44,659 as sale proceeds was not possible. Havi...
Tag this Judgment!Chalchitra Karmachari Sangh Vs. Proprietor, Regal Talkies and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1963
Reported in: AIR1964MP20; [1963(7)FLR328]; 1963MPLJ721
Dixit, C.J.1. This application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by the President of the Chalchitra Karmachari Sangh, Gwalior, is for the issue of writ of certiorari for quashing a decision of the Industrial Tribunal arrived at in the following circumstances.2. The management of Regal Talkies, Gwalior, terminated the services of fourteen of their employees. The petitioner-Sangh then espoused the cause of these employees and raised a dispute contending that the termination of their services was illegal as no charge-sheet was served on any of the employees, no enquiry of any kind was held and no employee was given any notice of retrenchment or paid retrenchment compensation under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Government then, in the exercise of its powers under Section 10(1) of the Act, referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal with the following terms of reference -'Whether there is a case ...
Tag this Judgment!Sheelchand and Co. Vs. State Transport Appellate Authority and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1963
Reported in: AIR1964MP8; 1964MPLJ311
Dixit, C.J. 1. This order will also govern Miscellaneous Petition No. 95 of 1963.2. The petitioner Sheelchand and Co.'s application for the grant of a stage carriage permit for Shujalpur-Bhopal route was rejected by the Regional Transport Authority, Bhopal. It was, however, granted in . appeal by the' State Transport Appellate Authority. While granting the permit applied for, the Appellate Authority made it conditional on the petitioner putting up a bus of 1962 model on the route. The other petitioner Suganchand Sheelchand and Company's application for the grant of a stage carriage permit for Sironj-Bhopal route was also similarly granted by the State Transport Appellate Authority and on the same condition. Both the petitioners now challenge the validity of the conditions attached to their permits, and pray for the issue of writs of certiorari for quashing them.3. It was argued by Shri Sen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, that each of the petitioners had been granted 'P....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Mahajan Bros.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1963
Reported in: 1963MPLJ761; [1963]14STC808(MP)
ORDERP.V. Dixit, C.J.1. In this reference under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, the question which we have been asked to answer is:-Whether hosiery goods come under item No. 2 of Part IV of Schedule II to the Act till the amendment of this item on 19th February, 1960, under Government Notification No. 136-2254-V-SR, dated 14th January, 1960 ?2. The facts are that M/s. Mahajan Brothers of Indore are dealers in hosiery. In the assessment of sales tax for the period from 1st April, 1959, to 31st March, 1960 they were assessed to sales tax on hosiery sold by them at the rate of four per cent., according to entry No. 1 of Part VI of Schedule II to the Act. The assessee contended that hosiery goods were liable to tax at the rate of one per cent., under entry No. 2 of Part IV of Schedule II as they were 'ready-made garments'. This contention was overruled by the Assistant Sa...
Tag this Judgment!Manaklal Jhamaklal Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1963
Reported in: AIR1966MP281; 1966CriLJ1139
ORDERS.B. Sen, J.1. In this criminal revision the only question for consideration is of sentence. The applicant has been convicted under Section 13 of the M. P Gambling Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one month.2. The reason given for sentence of imprisonment is that the accused has got to his credit five previous convictions. The Sessions Judge has also confirmed the same on the ground that the Magistrate did not exceed the maximum limit of sentence he is empowered to give and therefore rejected the appeal.3. The prosecution case as given in the judgment of the Sessions Judge is that the Station Officer Tehsildarsingh (P.W. 4) of Pardeshipura Indore received information that the appellant, who had a Gumti in front of the Kalvanmal Mills, indulges in gambling in American futures. He, therefore, sent Sub-Inspector Mansing to look into the matter. Mansingh went with a one rupee note, called a punter by name Ramvatar (P.W. 1) and in the presence of witnesses, marked the one rupee not...
Tag this Judgment!Badrilal Bholaram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-1963
Reported in: AIR1964MP9
Pandey, J. 1. This appeal comes before us on a reference made by Newaskar J. for considering a question relating to court-tee on which divergent views have been expressed in Single Bench decisions of this Court. We have also heard, along with this reference, Civil Revision No. 244 of 1963, in which a similar question has been raised. This order shall dispose of the revision.2 In Civil Suit No. 8 of 1955, out of which this appeal arises, the plaintiff claimed a declaration that certain orders passed by officers of the Forest Department, whereby they imposed on him a liability for Rs. 16,318-8-0 on account of price of trees said to have been illegally felled and by way of penalty, were illegal and against the terms of the forest contract. The plaintiff further claimed a permanentinjunction restraining the defendants from recovering the aforesaid amount. Since that suit was dismissed, he has filed this appeal. As in the Court of first instance, he has, in this appeal, valued the relief cl...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›