Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Hukumchand Mills Ltd. Vs. Industrial Court and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-31-1964
Reported in: (1966)IILLJ738MP
V.R. Newaskar, J.1. This is a petition Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for securing the quashing of the order passed by the industrial court.2. The material facts are that respondent 3, John Randive, was a permanent workman in the electric department of the petitioner-mills. On 17 May 1961 the electrical engineer of the mills Sri Lokesh, who was Randive's superior, ordered him to repair a motor starter which was given to him. Randive refused to do the work on the ground that the said work did not form part of his duties. On hearing the reply a chargesheet was issued to him for his misconduct as contemplated under standing Order 21 (4). The charge was that he had willfully disobeyed the 'lawful and reasonable order ' of his superior. After the service of the chargesheet a departmental inquiry was held and Randive was found guilty of the aforesaid misconduct. He was consequently ordered to be dismissed by an order dated 22 May 1961. Thereafter the respondent Randive approa...
Moolchand and ors. Vs. Maganlal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP75; 1965MPLJ89
1. This reference has been made by one of us (Newaskar J.) for resolving the conflict between the decisions in Lakhmichand v. Biharial, AIR, 1943 Nag 165 : ILR (1943) Nag 293 and Uttamchand Motilalji v. Wasudeo Deorao, AIR 1946 Nag 311 : ILR (1946) Nag 583. 2. The material facts are that on the basis of an unregistered award a money decree for Rs. 900/- creating a charge on a house belonging to the respondent was passed in favour of the appellants. In execution proceedings of that decree, the house was sold and purchased by the decree-holders themselves. Thereupon, the respondent objected, to the sale on the ground that the decree itself was a nullity inasmush as the award had not been registered as required by Section 17(1)(b) of the Indian Registration Act, 1908. This objection was) overruled by the executing Court. It, however, prevailed in appeal which the judgment-debtor) filed in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Dhar. The learned Additional District Judge, following th...
Mehtabsingh and Sons, Motors Hire Purchaser (P.) Ltd. Vs. State of Mad ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP36; 1965CriLJ182; 1964MPLJ845
Dixit, C.J.1. The petitioner in this case made an application under Sections 516-A and 517 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the First Class Magistrate, Neemuch, for restoration of a car which was ordered to be confiscated under Clause (d) of Section 11 of the Opium Act, 1878, consequent to the conviction of two persons, Surendrakumar and Omprakash, under Section 9-B of the Opium Act. The petitioner claimed that the car had been sold and delivered to the accused persons on hire-purchase agreement; and as they had failed to pay the instalments due from them, the ownership of the car remained with it; and that, therefore, even if the car had been used by the aforesaid persons for transporting opium contrary to the provisions of the Act it could not be confiscated. This application was rejected by the Magistrate taking the view that the provisions of Clause (d) of Section 11 were mandatory and if any conveyance was found to have been used for carrying opium in any case in which an ...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-21-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP40; (1965)IILLJ662MP; 1965MPLJ62
Dixit, C. J.1. The circumstances in which tills application under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed are that by a mortgage deed executed on 5th December 1959 the respondent No. 5, namely, Bhandari Iron and Steel Company Private Limited of Indore (hereinafter referred to as the Company), mortgaged its entire immoveable property with the petitioner, the State Bank of Indore (hereinafter referred to as the Bank). The said Company failed and neglected to pay the employer's contribution due from if under the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in respect of the periods from September, 1957, to July, 1958, and from August to September, 1958, and consequently proceedings for the recovery of the employer's contribution from the Company as an arrear of land revenue were started under Section 3 of the Act read with Section 155 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, (hereinafter referred to as the Code). In those proceedings, the Naib-Tah...
Ranojirao Madhavrao Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP77
Dixit, C.J.1. This order will also govern the disposal of Misc. Petition No. 22 of 1963.2. These are two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Cash Grants Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act.) The petitioners seek a declaration that the Act is invalid, ultra vires and unenforceable and pray that the opponent State be restrained by a suitable direction from putting the Act into operation.3. One of the petitioners claims to be the recipient of a cash payment of Rs. 500 per month as a muafidar from the respondent-State. The other petitioner says that as a silledar he is entitled to receive a cash payment of Rs. 72.50 nP. per month from the State, The petitioners claim that their right to receive these cash payments is 'property right' and that the impugned legislation has been enacted for the purpose of depriving them and other 'recipients of cash grants' of their property rights. Shortly stated their...
HussaIn Banu W/O Ibrahim Rangrez Vs. Shivnarayan S/O Kesrimal Mahajan ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1966MP307
H.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff whose suit for the declaration of title and recovery of possession of a house in Mahidpur (about the identity of which there is no dispute) has been dismissed by both the lower Courts by judgments whose effect is concurrent though the emphasis is somewhat different. The points for decision before us are, firstly, whether all the relevant facts are so clearly on the record that the contesting defendant may be permitted to support the decision on the principle of part of performance under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act though he had not expressly pleaded it in either of the two lower Courts. Secondly, if the contesting defendant is not permitted to invoke Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, whether he has proved that his transferor Shafi Mohammad has got the house from the plaintiff by gift which need not be evidenced by a registered deed when it is by a Muslim. Thirdly, whether the plaintiff can be held t...
KamalnaraIn Sharma Vs. Pt. Dwarka Prasad Mishra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1964
Reported in: AIR1965MP15; 1964MPLJ893
Dixit, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution for a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court from our decision, dated 15th April 1964, in Miscellaneous Petition No. 90 of 1964. By that decision we allowed an application filed by the opponent No. 1 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and issued a writ of certiorari quashing an order of the Election Tribunal, Raipur, permitting the petitioner to file a fresh affidavit for purposes of Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and directed the Tribunal to determine, in the light of cur decision sought to be appealed against, the effect of the petitioner's failure to file an affidavit along with the election petition as required by the proviso to Section 83(1) of the Act on the allegations of corrupt practices made by him in his election petition.2. The material facts, briefly stated, are that the petitioner filed an election petition quest...
Chhatersingh and anr. Vs. Jalamsingh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-1964
Reported in: AIR1966MP350
ORDERP.K. Tare, J. 1. This appeal under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code is by the judgment-debtors and is directed against the order, dated 30-11-1963, passed by Shri P.B. Thakre, Additional District Judge, West Nimar, Mandleshwar, in Civil Appeal No. 36-A of 1963, affirming the order, dated, 8-10-1963, passed by Shri A.K. Khare, Civil Judge Class II, Kasrawad, in Execution Case No. 2 of 1963. 2. A decree for possession of certain lands was passed in favour of the respondent on the condition that he deposited an amount of Rs. 1100. Upon such deposit, he would be entitled to claim back possession of the lands. That decree was passed on 4-7-1955. 3. The respondent earlier filed execution case No. 201 of 1957. In that execution, he did not deposit the entire amount of Rs.1100, but merely deposited Rs. 475 on 11-2-1958. As the entire amount was not deposited, the execution was dismissed on 14-4-60. Subsequently, the respondent filed the present execution on 12-4-1963, and in that he...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›