Madhya Pradesh Court December 1964 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.
H.W.F. D'Souza Vs. Chandrikasingh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1966MP223
ORDERShiv Dayal, J.1. The revision-petitioner raised a preliminary point in the trial Court that the suit be dismissed as he is a judicial officer and is protected by the Judicial Officers Protection Act, 1850. The trial Judge has postponed decision of that issue saying that it would be decided after recording evidence of both the parties inasmuch as before any protection is given to the defendant, the fact that he had jurisdiction to do the acts complained of is to be established and for that purpose evidence is necessary.2. It is averred in the plaint that the plaintiff commands great respect in the society. He is an ex-Malguzar possessing about 45 acres of agricultural lands jointly with his brother, Onkarsingh; his annual income is about Rs. 10,000. Before the merger of the States, he was in the employ of the Ruler of Sakti State as a Mukhtar. Mr. D'Souza (the defendant) is the Sub-Divisional Magistrate at Sakti. The defendant is very friendly with Satyanarain and Sadhuram, proprie...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ramjan and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1964
Reported in: AIR1967MP24; 1967CriLJ80
Krishnan, J.1. This State appeal is from the acquittal by a Magistrate, of charges under sections 3 and 4 of the Gambling Act of eight persons among whom Mangilal son of Jamnaram was the owner of a house which was presumed to be a common gambling-house, and the others seven in number who it was alleged were actually present at the lime of the search in execution of a warrant ostensibly issued under Section 5 of the Act were presumed to have been present there for the purpose of gambling. Several of the allegations about the actual process of the gambling having been disbelieved, the case centers round the propriety or otherwise of raising under Section 6 of the same Act the presumption that it was a common gaming house and that the persons had collected there for the purpose of gambling. That not having been rebutted, it is urged by the State that these persons should have been convicted under the respective sections even though on the facts we may not be prepared to hold that there wa...
Premchand JaIn Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP196
Pandey, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against:(i) the proposed Scheme No. 2, as prepared under Section 68C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the Act) by the Madhya Pradesh State, Road Transport Corporation (to be called hereafter as the Transport Corporation) and published in the State Gazette dated 1 March 1963;(ii) the order dated 25 June 1963 whereby R. S. Shukla, Special Secretary in the Home Department, disposed of the objections preferred against the aforesaid Scheme and modified it;(iii) the final publication, after previous approval of the Central Government, of the approved Scheme in the State Gazette dated 7 February 1964 as required by Section 68D of the Act, and(iv) the order dated 17th March 1964 passed under Section 68F(2) of the Act by which the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior, cancelled the permit held by the petitioner for the Lashkar-Barai route and required him to surrender that permit...
Mohanmurari Vs. Smt. Kusumkumari
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-22-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP194; 1965MPLJ321
Naik, J.1. The judgment in this appeal shall also dispose of first appeal No. 66 of 1963.2. Facts relevant for our purpose are as follows. Mohanmurari and Smt. Kusumkumari were married at Gwalior on 20th June 1957. Their gauna was performed on or about 19th November 1957. The wife Smt. Kusum Kumari came to her parents' house some time in January 1958 and has not gone to her husband's house since. In November 1962, the husband Mohanmurari filed a suit against the wife Smt. Kusumkumari for restitution of conjugal rights, on the allegation that she had been staying at her father's place without any reasonable cause. The wife Smt. Kusumkumari denied the claim of her husband but claimed an annulment of her marriage with Mohanmurari on the allegation that he was impotent at the time of her marriage with him and had continued to be so till the institution of the suit.3. The trial Court dismissed the husband's suit for restitution of conjugal rights but decreed the suit of the wife annulling t...
Central India Electric Supply Company Workers' Union Ltd. Vs. Central ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-1964
Reported in: (1966)IILLJ212MP; 1965MPLJ350
ORDERK.L. Pandey, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against an award dated 27 April 1964 whereby the industrial court, Madhya Pradesh, rejected the demands of Central India Electric Supply Company Workers' Union (hereinafter called the union) and directed that Central India Electric Supply Company, Ltd. (hereinafter called the company), would be entitled to recover the amounts paid as interim relief to its employees from the retrenchment compensation payable to them.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are not in contest and may be shortly .stated. In the year 1958, there was a dispute between the workers of the union, who are employed in the power-house at Katni, and the company, who was their employer, about certain demands made by the workers. In due course, a reference was made under Section 38A of the Central Provinces and Berar Industrial Disputes Settlement Act, 1947. The award made on that reference was announced on 20 March 1962...
Chanda Chhitar Lodha Vs. Mst. Nandu W/O Chanda Lodha
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP268; 1965MPLJ583
Krishnan, J.1. The defendant-appellant (husband) has come up in appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Rajgarh, granting a divorce to the plaintiff-respondent (wife) in her suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The main reason for the divorce, which the appellant has admitted as a fact is that he has been living with another woman whom he has married as his wife, as the facts show, after the commencement of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The plaintiff-respondent herself had been married to him several years before that date. 2. In the judgment, which is somewhat brief possibly on account of the facts being admitted, it is not expressly made out whether the decree was being passed in accordance with the ground in Section 13(2)(i) or that in Section 13(1)(i) of the Act. The argument here is that the 'marriage' of the second 'wife' having been solemnized after the commencement of the Act, she is really no wife at all in the eyes of th...
The State of M.P. Vs. Pukhraj Moolchand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-15-1964
Reported in: AIR1966MP296a; 1966CriLJ1272
ORDERP.R. Sharma, J.1. This case conies up before me on a report submitted by the Additional Sessions Judge Rajnandgaon recommending that the proceedings under Section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) pending against the present non-applicant, be quashed.2. The non-applicant is being prosecuted in the Court of the Magistrate First Class Rajnandgaon for keeping for sale adulterated edible oil on his shop.3. An objection was raised by the accused that there being no valid sanction for his prosecution under Section 20(1) ot the Act, the proceedings against him are entirely without jurisdiction. Section 20(1) of the Act runs as under:--'No prosecution for an offence under this Act shall be instituted except by or with the written consent of the State Government or a local authority, or a person authorised in this behalf by the State Government or a local authority.'The State Government by Notification No. 7770-XVII-H in the M. P...
State of M.P. Vs. Mustaq HussaIn Azad and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP137; 1965CriLJ711; 1965MPLJ345
Sharma, J.1. In Criminal Case No. 3063 of 1964 on the file of the Magistrate, First Class, Durg, the three respondents in Criminal Appeal No. 410 of 1964, along with the petitioner T. L. Shrinivasan in Criminal Revision No. 360 of 1964, were, on the basis of their own pleas of guilty convicted of offences under Sections 19(5) and 20(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Public Security Act, 1959. Out of the convicted persons, the three respondents in Criminal Appeal No. 410 of 1964 filed an appeal against their conviction and sentence, which was allowed by Shri O. R. Siddiqui. Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Durg. The learned Judge, while allowing the appeal preferred by these persons, made certain observations in his judgment against certain officials of the Bhilai Steel Project, whose names had been mentioned in the affidavits filed before the learned Judge. These officers have filed petitions (Miscellaneous Criminal Cases Nos. 250 to 256 of 1964) under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Proced...
The Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Mohammad HussaIn Rahim Bux
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP253; 1965MPLJ328; [1965]16STC302(MP)
Dixit, C.J. 1. This is an application under Articles 132 and 133 of the Constitution for a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court from our order dated 30th July 1964 in Miscellaneous Civil Case No 71 of 1964 answering a reference made to this Court at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958. 2. This application must be dismissed. It has been held by the Supreme Court in Commr. of Income-fax v. Patel and Co. AIR 1960 SC 278, that when under a statute certain questions of law arc referred to the High Court for decision, the decision given by the High Court on the reference is in the exercise of its advisory or consultative jurisdiction; and the provisions of the Constitution in regard to the certificate for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court do not in terms apply. In Sriram Gulabdas v. Board of Revenue (M. P.), AIR 1954 Nag 1 (FB), the majority decision of the Full Bench was no doubt that a decision given ...
Himatsingh Kubersingh Vs. Board of Revenue and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-1964
Reported in: AIR1966MP43
ORDER1. This is a reference by two learned Judges of this Court hearing a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking, inter alia a writ of certiorari for quashing an order dated 31st October 1961 of the Board of Revenue rejecting the petitioner's application for a review of the decision dated 14th February 1959 of the Board of Revenue in an appeal under Section 29 of the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the Act). The Board of Revenue held that it had no power to review its decision given in an appeal under Section 29 of the Act. The question that the learned Judges of the Division Bench have referred to us for decision is whether the Board of Revenue, has the power under the Act to review its decision given in an appeal preferred to the Board of Revenue under Section 29 of the Act against an order of the Jagir Commissioner.2. An appeal against a decision of the Jagir Commissioner lies to the Board of Revenue under Section 29(...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »