Madhya Pradesh Court January 1967 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hukumchand Mohanlal, Proprietor Hira La ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1967
Reported in: AIR1967MP262
Dixit, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. Madhya Pradesh, Nagpur and Bhandara The question which has been propounded by the Tribunal for our decision is:-- 'Whether the sum of Rs. 24,341 was liable to lax under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act 1961?' 2. The material facts are that one Kanhaiyalal used to carry on business as selling agent of Messrs Mohanlal Hargovinddas of Jabalpur under the name and style of 'Messrs Hukumchand Mohanlal'. On or about 17th February 1960 Kanhaiyalal died His widow Hira Laxmi succeeded to the business of selling agent carried on by her husband and continued it under the same name and style, namely. 'Messrs Hukumchand Mohanlal'. The firm of Mohanlal Hargovinddas had recovered from Kanhaiyalal an amount of Rs. 24.341 as sales tax for transactions effected during the period from 26th January 1950 to 31st March 1951. Kanhaiyalal...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, M. P. Vs. Hukumchand Mohanlal.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1967
Reported in: [1967]64ITR341(MP)
DIXIT C.J. - This is a reference under section 56(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh, Nagpur and Bhandara. The question which has been propounded by the Tribunal for our decision is :'Whether the sum of Rs. 24,341 was liable to tax under section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'The material facts are that one Kanhaiyalal used to carry on business as selling agent of Messrs. Mohanlal Hargovinddas of Jabalpur under the name and style of 'Messrs. Hukumchand Mohanlal'. On or about 17th February, 1960, Kanhaiyalal died. His widow, Hira Laxmi, succeeded to the business of selling agent carried on by her husband and continued it under the same name and style, namely, 'Messrs. Hukumchand Mohanlal'. The firm of Mohanlal Hargovinddas had recovered from Kanhaiyalal an amount of Rs. 24,341 as sales tax for transactions effected during the period from 26th January, 1950, to 31st March 1951. Kanhai...
Tag this Judgment!Bhuwan Ramsingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-1967
Reported in: 1968CriLJ414
V.R. Newaskar, J.1. Appellants Bhuwan and Nakdiya were prosecuted before the Additional Sessions Judge, Alirajpur, for the murder of Ramsingh on the 14th of April 1965 at the village Bardala. They were found guilty, the former under Section 302, I.P.C. and the latter under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and were sentenced to life imprisonment.2. Both appealed. Appeal of Bhuwan is No. 447 of 1965 and that of Nakdiya is No. 448 of 1965. Both these appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment.3. Material facts leading to the prosecution of the appellants are as follows;4. Deceased Ramsingh owned a 'tada' tree situated in the field of Bhuwan from which toddy used to be tapped. Ramsingh complained that the appellant Bhuwan often stealthily tapped toddy from his tree. On the 14th of April 1965 Ramsingh came to the house of Dedu at about 1 P.M. after tapping toddy from his 'Tada' tree. Just then Bhuwan and Nakdiya happened to go there. Bhuwan at that time wa...
Tag this Judgment!Jugal Kishore Vs. Tahsildar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1967
Reported in: AIR1967MP206
Dixit, C.J.1. The circumstances in which this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been filed are that on 10th January 1955 the Nyaya Panchayat, Nagod, made an order for the allotment of a piece of land lying in the area of the Gram Panchayat, Nagod, to the petitioner on his paying a certain Nazarana. The petitioner paid the Nazarana and secured the land. Thereafter, according to him, when he commenced the construction of a house on the plot, the Patwari reported to the Assistant Collector Satna, that the applicant had encroached upon the land. On this report, the Assistant Collector directed the Tehsildar to initiate proceedings for cancellation of the order of allotment. This order of the Assistant Collector was, however, ultimately set aside by the Board of Revenue on 15th July 1959.2. In 1964 on the report of the Gram Panchayat, Nagod, complaining against the allotment of the land to the petitioner, the Tehsildar started proceedings against him under Secti...
Tag this Judgment!Abdulgafoor S/O Ramjan Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-1967
Reported in: AIR1968MP29; 1968CriLJ172
Krishnan, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of the nature of habeas corpus presented on 10-3-1966, by Abdul Gafoor who had been arrested on 27-2-1966 moving about in Neemuch and having a Pakistanee Passport with the photograph removed, which as well as the visa ceased to be valid in 1956 itself The civil authority proceeded on the footing that he is a Pakistanee citizen who having coma to India in 1956 and having reported departure in March 1956, had come again and had remained in concealment for ten years till he was arrested. Accordingly, an order under Paragraph 5 (1) of the Foreigners Internment Order 1962 was served on him and he was arrested and detained at Neemuch pending removal to the internment camp which for this area is the one at Ajmer.2. After the petition was filed an order was made by this Court staying deportation the civil authority withdrew the internment order, and after releasing the petitioner served another order, under Clau...
Tag this Judgment!Kamta Prasad Vs. Registrar, Co-operative Societies and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1967
Reported in: AIR1967MP211
Dixit, C.J.1. By this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the petitioner Kamta Prasacl seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing an order passed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, on 31st May 1966 expelling him from 14 Co-operative Societies registered under the Madhya Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. , An appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of the Registrar was rejected by the State Government and a writ of certiorari has been sought for quashing also this order of the Government.2. The material facts are that till the passing of the impugned order the applicant was a member of 14 Co-operative Societies. He was a primary member of some of the Cooperative Societies and also President or Chairman of some of them. In other Co-operative Societies, he was a member of the managing committee. Of the Co-operative Societies in which the petitioner was a member, some are banking Co-operative Societies and others are marketing Co-operative Soc...
Tag this Judgment!Ganpat Pannalal Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-17-1967
Reported in: AIR1967MP286; [1967]19STC384(MP)
Dixit, C.J.1. In this reference by the Sales Tax Tribunal, pursuant to the direction given by this Court on 15th January 1966 on an application made by the assessee. M/s Ganpat Pannalal of Harda under Section 44 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, the question to be answered is-'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the goods worth Rs 150386-2-9 delivered outside the State as a result of sale were covered under the Explanation to Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution and, consequently, were exempt from sales tax?'2. The material facts are that in proceedings for assessment of sales tax under the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, for the period from 22nd October 1949 to 9th November 1950, the assessee a dealer in grains, oil-seeds, cotton etc., claimed that its turnover of Rs. 2,73,720-0-3 of oilseeds sold to dealers outside Madhya Pradesh could not be taxed as those sales were 'Explanation' sales under Article 286(1) of the Constitution ...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnabai Vs. Punamchand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-12-1967
Reported in: AIR1967MP200
Surajbhan, J. 1. This is an appeal by Krishnabai, wife of Punamchand, respondent, against the judgment and decree of 18-1-1965, passed by the learned District Judge, Khandwa, under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 2. Respondent Punamchand, husband of the appellant, filed a petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act for judicial separation alleging that the appellant is the legally married wife of the respondent and they have one daughter, aged about 4 years, from their legal wedlock. After the marriage, the appellant lived for 4 to 6 months with the respondent; she was quarrelling with her parents-in-law and had developed illicit intimacy with one Lallusingh of Harsud with the result that the respondent filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 29-6-1960 for dissolution of the marriage. It was registered as Civil Suit No. 13-A of 1960 in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Khandwa, but a compromise was effected between the parties, and the app...
Tag this Judgment!Baijnath Prasad Gupta Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-1967
Reported in: AIR1968MP26
ORDER1. The petitioner in this case questions the legalitv of Clause 4 of the Madhya Pradesh Paddy Procurement (Levy) Order, 1965 (hereinafter referred to at the Order) and prays that the said provision be declared to be invalid and a direction be issued to the opponent-State restraining it from enforcing the provision.2. According to the applicant, he holds a licence under the Foodgrains Dealers Licensing Order, 1965, which entitles him to deal in foodgrairis and that until the promulgation of the Order he and other licence holders like him used to purchase paddy, get it milled in the shelter type rice mills and used to sell the rice thus produced to the Government at prices fixed by the Government. The Madhya Pradesh Paddy Procurement (Levy) Order, 1965, was promulgated by the Government on 9th December 1965 in the exercise of its powers under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Clause 2 (b) of the Order defines 'dealer' thus--'Dealer' means a person engaged in the busin...
Tag this Judgment!Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Sudhakar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-1967
Reported in: AIR1968MP47
Tare, J.1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous (First) Appeal No. 10 of 1984 (Sudhaker v. State of M. P. and others); Miscellaneous (First) Appeal No. 16 of 1964 (M. P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Sudhakar and another); Miscellaneous (First) Appeal No. 17 of 1964 (M. P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Sudhakar and another); Miscellaneous (First) Appeal No. 13 of 1964 (M. P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Shaileshkumar and another); Miscellaneous (First) Appeal No. 14 of 1964 (M. P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Smt. Indubala Bhandari and another) and Miscellaneous (First) Appeal No. 15 of 1964 (M. P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Vasudeo s/o Keshavrao Vyas and another). One of the connected appeals, namely, Miscellaneous (First) Appeal No. 60 of 1963 (M. P. State Road Transport Corporation and another v. Smt. Munnabai and others), which arose out of another Bus accident, has been disposed of by us by a separate judgment.These appea...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »