Skip to content

Madhya Pradesh Court September 1967 Judgments

Sep 29 1967

Sharangdhar Sharma Pathak Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Sep-29-1967

Reported in: (1968)IILLJ268MP

P.V. Dixit, C.J.1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks a writ of ceritorari for quashing an order of the Vice-Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, reverting Mm from his appointment in Class I to Class II service.2. The matter arises thus. In August 1962, the petitioner joined service in the former State of Madhya Bharat, and was appointed as a Lecturer in Agronomy, He was con-firmed la that post, on 27 November 1968. On 13 September 1956 he was appointed as Agronomists at the Agricultural Research, Institute, Gwaller, in the higher scale of Rs. 300-20--500. According to the return filed by the respondent-State, this appointment in the higher scale was temporary. According to the applicant after the formation of the new State of Madhya Pradesh he was directed to take charge as Professor of Agriculture on 7 October 1958; that there-after for some reason, not made known to him, the Government did not consider his...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 1967

Smt. Hirabai Chauhan Vs. Mst. Bhagirathibai

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Sep-25-1967

Reported in: AIR1969MP241

Pandey, J. 1. The main question for consideration in this appeal is whether the parties are governed by the Lex Loci or by the personal law of the parties.2. The question arises in this manner. It is no longer disputed, though it was in contest in the Courts below, that one Jagan Mahar owned the house in dispute which is situate at Rajnandgaon. He had by his wife Gujji a son, Mangya, and three daughters, Kamalji, Bhagi and Kisni. It transpired that Mangya, Bhagi and Kisni predeceased Jagan, who died in 1929 leaving behind him surviving his widow Gujji, a daughter Kamalji and two sons of his daughter Kisni, namely, Atmaram and Rajaram. On Jagan's death, the widow Gujji inherited the house. Upon her death in 1936, her daughter Kamalji took the house. Kamalji died on 4 October 1952 leaving a daughter, Bhagirathibai, as her only issue. The suit, out of which this appeal arises, was filed by Bhagirathibai, Jagans daughter's daughter against Rajaram, Jagan's daughter's son, for possession of...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 1967

Gopalkishan Son of Bhimsen Sachdeva and anr. Vs. the Sales Tax Officer ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Sep-25-1967

Reported in: [1968]21STC109(MP)

ORDERR.J. Bhave, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners seek a writ of certiorari for quashing an assessment order dated 4th October, 1966, passed by the respondent No. 1. The petitioners also seek a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from giving effect to the said order. By the said order, Messrs Bhimsen Sachdeva, Marhatal, Jabalpur, an unregistered dealer, has been assessed to sales tax for the period from 1st April, 19,59 to 31st March, 1965. The tax liability has been determined at Rs. 20,600 and a penalty in the like amount has been imposed.2. The petitioners entered into partnership with their father, Bhimsen Sachdeva, in the year 1964 and carried on the business of iron and steel in the name and style of 'Messrs Sachdeva & Company.' Bhimsen Sachdeva died on 4th April, 1965. The petitioners' case is that sometime before the death of Bhimsen Sachdeva, he had retired from the partnership and the partnership business thereafter was ca...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1967

Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Caltex (India) Ltd.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Sep-22-1967

Reported in: AIR1968MP191; 1968MPLJ527

Dixit, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 44 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, by the Sales TaxTribunal (Board of Revenue) at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh. The questions, which have been referred for decision, are-'1. Whether an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Sales Tax passed in revision Under Section 22 (5) of the C.P. & Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, as extended to Vindhya Pradesh lies to the Board? (2) Whether the present appeal was an appeal 'Under Section 39 (3) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act and was within time? (3) Whether the declarations which were not on form No. IX under the C. P. & Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, as extended to Vindhya Pradesh, and in which the words 'use in the manufacture' were not scored out could be accepted as correct declarations if the purchasing dealers certified the purpose of resale subsequently?' 2. The assessee, M/s Caltex (India) Ltd., is a dealer in petrol and other petro...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 1967

Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Regional Transport ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Sep-20-1967

Reported in: AIR1968MP168

Bhave, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing 29 temporary permits granted to the Raipur Transport Company (Private) Limited, Raipur (respondent No. 3) by the Regional Transport Authority, Raipur (respondent No. 1) in exercise of powers under Section 62(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Annexure 'A' is the list of the 29 routes for which the temporary permits have been granted.2. Out of the said routes, some are partially affected by Scheme No. 13 and others by Scheme No. 23 notified under Chapter IV-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. Scheme No. 31 has also been brought into operation as a result of which all the 29 routes are completely covered. The three schemes are under challenge in writ petitions filed by the third respondent. In Scheme Nos. 13 and 23 this Court refused to stay the operation of the schemes, but passed conditional orders. They are reproduced below:'Scheme No. 13: The Regional Transport Authority, Ra...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 14 1967

Upendralal Vs. Smt. Narainee Devi Jha

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Sep-14-1967

Reported in: AIR1968MP89; (1969)IILLJ285MP

ORDERS.P. Bhargava, J.1. The petitioner Upendralal Choudhary challenges by this election petition the election of the respondent Smt. Narainee Devi Jha who was elected from Mandla Constituency No. 162 of the Vidhan Sabha of Madhya Pradesh. In the election many candidates had taken part but the petitioner has impleaded in his petition the respondent alone as the relief which he has sought in the petition is that the election of the respondent is void.2. The grounds on which the petition is based may be stated thus. The petitioner urged that he was in temporary Government service of the State of Madhya Pradesh; that he had sent notice of his intention to terminate his service as Naib-Tahsildar on 29-11-1966; that he had sent one copy of the notice to the Collector, Narsinghpur, and the other to the Secretary, Revenue Department and the acknowledgment receipts of the said two notices respectively are Ex. P-3 and Ex. P-4 on record; that the notice on the State Government had been served on...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 1967

Union of India (Uoi) Through General Manager, South-eastern Railway, C ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Sep-06-1967

Reported in: AIR1970MP49; 1969MPLJ834

ORDERR.J. Bhave, J.1. This revision Is by the Union of India through the General Manager, South-Eastern Railway, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the 'Railway Administration') against the order of the lower Court, dated 20-1-1967, passed under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act appointing Shri N. S. Tayabji, Chief Engineer (Construction), Eastern Railway, Calcutta, as the arbitrator.2. The facts of the case are that the non-applicant S. V. Krishna Rao (herein-after referred to as 'the contractor') had entered into a contract dated 2-12-1963 with the Railway Administration for carrying out certain work at Manendra-garh Station. The contractor was also required to undertake certain additional work, the details of which are given in the application filed by the contractor under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. It is the case of both the parties that the General Conditions of contract framed by the Railway Administration formed part of the contract dated 2-12-1963. Condition No. 62 of...

Tag this Judgment!

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›


Save Judgments · Add Notes · Store Search Results · Organize Client Files

Start your Free Trial