Madhya Pradesh Court December 1969 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.
Collector, Jabalpur and anr. Vs. Nawab Ahmad Yar Jahagir Khan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-22-1969
Reported in: AIR1971MP32; 1970MPLJ465
Bhargava, J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of First Appeal No. 35 of 1968 also. Both the appeals arise out of the acquisition of open land belonging to the respondent for the construction of Auto Exchange building of the Post and Telegraph Department at Jabalpur.2. Under two notifications issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act), 31330 sq. ft of land and 32400 sq. ft. of land, adjoining each other, were acquired. The notifications are dated 30-3-1963 and 26-7-1962, respectively. 31330 sq. ft. of land has frontage of 175 feet and is about 200 feet deep. The other land is situated immediately behind it and has no frontage. Behind both the acquired lands there is left to the respondent about 50000 sq. ft. of open land. In continuation of that land the respondent has his buildings. For brevity's sake, we will call the acquisition of 31330 sq.ft. of land as the 'first case' and the other case as the 'second case' throughout this judgment.3....
Balu Deochand Kulmi and anr. Vs. Fundibai Amichand Kulmi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1969
Reported in: AIR1972MP22
S.P. Bhargava, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of the point referred to the Full Bench in civil revisions Nos. 497/66, 498/66 and 521/67. In this case and cases Nos. 497/66 and 498/66 reference has been made by Krishnan, J. and in the last case by S.B. Sen, J. All these revisions were filed in the High Court by plaintiffs in different cases who were required to pay the deficit court-fee on market value under Section 7(v)(d) of the Court-fees Act (hereinafter called the Act). The references are confined to the question that whether for purposes of assessing the court-fee in a suit regarding a fraction or part of a holding the whole of which is assessed to revenue or to payment of the nature of rent in the absence of revenue, the plaintiff should be required to pay the court-fee on his claim on the market value of the land under Section 7(v)(d) of the Court-fees Act, or whether the subject-matter should be allowed to be valued on the basis of the revenue payable on the ent...
Gunvantrai Harivallabh Jani Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1969
Reported in: AIR1970MP221; 1970MPLJ226
Pandey, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directedagainst-(i) an order dated February 8, 1967 holding that the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act) were rightly applied to the petitioner's establishment; (ii) an order dated April 15, 1967 declining to review the order regarding the applicability of the Act to that establishment; (iii) a notice dated June 21, 1967 intimating to the petitioner the provisional assessment and permtting him, if he so desired, to make any representation against it; and (iv) an order dated October 81, 1967 making the provisional assessment final. 2. The facts giving rise to this petition may be shortly stated. The petitioner carries on the business of manufacture and sale of bidis at Rajnandgaon. The bidi-making industry is not one of the industries specified in Schedule I to the Act. Even so, by a notification No. G. S. R. 346 dated March 17, 1962, issued under Section 1(3)(b) ...
Ziaul Hasan and ors. Vs. Pannalal Nanoomal Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1969
Reported in: AIR1972MP209; 1972MPLJ91
R.J. Bhave, J.1. This appeal is by the tenants against the decree of the lower appellate Court confirming the decree of the trial Court for ejectment.2. The house in question, of which the defendants are the tenants, or subtenants, was purchased by the plaintiff-firm under a registered sale-deed dated 22-9-1959 from Mulla Mohsin Ali, resident of Bhopal. On the date of the purchase. Zawar Hussain (defendant No. 4) was in occupation of the house on a monthly rent of Rs. 28/8/-. The plaintiff's case was that after the plaintiff-firm purchased the house, the lease in favour of the defendant No. 4 was determined by mutual settlement as a result of which the possession of the first floor of the house was given to the plaintiff-firm, while the premises in question, that is, the shop on the ground floor was leased out to the defendants 1 to 3 from 1-1-1960 at the instance of the defendant No. 4 on a monthly rent of Rs. 101/-. It is alleged that the defendants 2 and 3 are partners of the defend...
Smt. Kamla Devi and ors. Vs. Kishanchand and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1970MP168; 1970MPLJ273
Singh, J.1. This appeal under Section 110-Dof the Motor Vehicles Act is against an award made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal allowing a sum of Rs. 4,000/- as compensation payable to the appellants by the second respondent on account of the death of one Gurmukhdas, who was knocked down by a jeep. The jeep though owned by the first respondent, was borrowed on the date of the accident by the second respondent. The accident took place when the second respondent who was himself driving the jeep was going to the station to receive his guest. It has been found by the Tribunal that the accident took place as a result of the negligence of the second respondent in driving the jeep. As at the time of the accident the jeep was not being used for the purpose of the owner, the first respondent was absolved from liability and that finding is not challenged before us. The grievance of the appellants in this appeal is that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inordinately low. A...
Vinod Kumar Shrivastava Vs. Ved Mitra Vohra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1970MP172; 1970MPLJ306
Singh, J.1. This is an appeal against an award made by the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur. The appellant Vinod Kumar Shrivastava was knocked down by a motor truck on 10th March, 1963 and received bodily injuries. The truck at therelevant time was owned by the first respondent, was driven by his driver the second respondent and was insured with the third respondent. The appellant claimed before the Tribunal a sum of Rs. 20,000/- as compensation against the respondents in respect of bodily injuries suffered by him in the accident. By the award under appeal the claim has been allowed to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-. The appellant has come up to this Court for enhancement of the award.2. The appellant at the time of the accident was seventeen years of age and was a student. He was knocked down from behind while going on foot and his left leg came under the wheels of the motor truck resulting in a compound fracture of lower one-third Tibia and Fibula bones. The leg was immobilised fr...
Mantorabai Vs. Paretanbai and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1972MP145; 1972MPLJ7
Surajbhan, J.1. This is a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure by Mantorabai (defendant) against the confirming judgment and decree passed by the learned AdditionalDistrict Judge, Bilaspur, whereby he held that the defendant-appellant having remarried in Churi form defendant No. 2 Sunder, she has lost all her rights and interests in the property of her former husband Amru.2. Paretanbai (Plaintiff-respondent No. 11 had filed a suit for ejectment against the appellant and respondent No. 2 Sunder from the house as well as the land situated at village Rani Dera left by Amru some 17 years back on his death. She alleged that she was the legally married wife of Ramkhilawan, son of Amru, and Amru on his death, left Ramkhilawan and the appellant, his widow, as his heirs. According to her Mantorabai (appellant) married Sunder (respondent No. 2) some six years before she filed the suit and on account of her remarriage, she lost all her rights and interests to the propert...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Devilal Shivlal Paliwal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1969
Reported in: AIR1970MP187
Shiv Dayal, J. 1. This appeal arises from a suit for the recovery of Rs. 55,000/-as value of wood which belonged to the plaintiff and was seized by the Revenue Officers in exercise of powers under Section 202 of the C. P. Land Revenue Act, 1917. 2. Shivlal (whose legal representatives are respondents Devilal and Smt Godavaribai) brought a suit against the State on the allegation that he was a Malguzar Lambar-dar of village Rohna, Settlement No. 350, Patwari Circle No. 14, tahsil and district Chhindwara. He did cutting of trees in some portion of his malguzari jungle at Rohna in the year 1949-50. The cut wood of teak, Biwla and other trees was lying in the jungle and outside it. The plaintiff had started the work of cutting trees in the forest from February 1949 to August 15, 1950. The plaintiff completely observed the rules framed for cutting Jungle but under the impression that the provisions of Section 202 of the Land Revenue Act had not been observed, the State started proceedings a...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Devilal Shivlal Palliwal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1969
Reported in: AIR1970MP179; 1970MPLJ119
Shiv Dayal, J.1. This appeal arises from a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,05,000/-as value of wood which belonged to the plaintiff and was seized by' Revenue Officers in exercise of powers under Section 202, of the C. P. Land Revenue Act, 1917.2. Shivlal (whose legal representatives are respondents Devilal and Smt. Godavaribai) brought the suit against the State on the allegation that he was a Malguzar Lambardar of village Jamalpani, Settlement No. 154, Patwari Circle No. 24, Tahsil Sausar, district Chhindwara. He did cutting of trees in some portion of his malguzari jungle at Jamalpani in the year 1949-50. The cut teak wood and fire wood were lying in the jungle and outside it. The plaintiff did the cutting work in the forest from September 18, 1949 to October 19, 1950. The plaintiff completely observed the rules framed for cutting jungles, but under the impression that the provisions of Section 202 of the Land Revenue Act had not been observed, the State started proceedings against the p...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur and Bhandara, Nagpur Vs. Captain, H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-1969
Reported in: AIR1970MP205; [1970]76ITR404(MP); 1970MPLJ403
A.P. Sen, J.1. The question of law stated by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, Bench 'A', at the instance of the Commissioner for the opinion of the Court is as follows:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the sum of Rs. 1,67,345 received by the assessee during the year under consideration is covered by the 2nd Explanation to Section 7(1) of the Act as it stood prior to its amendment by Section 5 of Finance Act, 1955.'2. The sum of Rs. 1,67,345/- represents the payment to the assessee, Capt. H.C. Dhanda on 28th January 1955 by His Highness Maharaja Yeshwant Rao Holkar, the Senior Up-Rajpramukh of the erstwhile State of Madhya Bharat, in full and final settlement of his claim for damages for wrongful termination of his services as personal Adviser to his Highness. The whole question here is, were the moneys which the assessee so received after cessation of his office as compensation, in respect of which he was assessed for the year 1955-56, part of his in...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›