Madhya Pradesh Court October 1971 Judgments
Amirchand Meghraj Vs. Devidas Bhogaram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1973MP15; 1972MPLJ1000
Shiv Dayal, J.1. This second appeal arises from a suit for redemption and, in the alternative, for specific performance of a contract of reconveyance.2. By a deed of sale dated September 4, 1961, (Ex. P-l). Nanhelal (Plaintiff No. 2) purported to have sold two houses for Rs. 3,000/- to Amirchand (defendant No. 1). Possession was given to Amirchand. That sale-deed contained an agreement of reconveyance within three years on payment of Rs. 3,000/-.3. Nanhelal gave two notices to Amirchand to redeem and reconvey the suit houses to him. Jugal Kishore (defendant No. 2) is tenant of Amirchand. On September 2. 1964, Nanhelal sold the suit houses to Devidas (plaintiff No. 1) for Rs. 5,000/-.4. The suit was Instituted on September 3, 1964, by Devidas and Nanhelal.5. Amirchand resisted the suit. The trial Court held that the transaction of September 4. 1961, amounted to a usufructuary mortgage with a condition of sale. It was not a sale out and out, Nanhelal sent a notice dated August 25, 1964, ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bhagwandas Rikhiram
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1971
Reported in: 1972MPLJ129; [1972]29STC541(MP)
R.J. Bhave, J. 1. The Board of Revenue has referred the following question at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh :Whether the assessee's bardana worth Rs. 36,348 sold in the course of inter-State trade is not liable to sales tax under the Central Sales Tax Act on the ground that it was tax paid under the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958?2. The assessee is a dealer in grains. For the purposes of his business he purchases gunny bags (bardana) and sells them along with grain. During the assessment period the assessee had purchased bardana worth Rs. 86,463.31 on which State tax was already paid. In the course of the business he sold along with the grain bardana worth Rs. 36,348.19 in the course of inter-State transactions. On the sales of bardana worth Rs. 36,348.19 the assessee was taxed at 7 per cent, under the Central Sales Tax Act, as he failed to produce 'C' forms from the registered dealers from whom the bardana was purchased. The plea of the assessee was ...
Tag this Judgment!Kalyansingh Rathor and ors. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1971
Reported in: AIR1972MP84; 1972MPLJ131
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J. 1. This is a petition by three members of Gram Panchayats who have challenged the validity of the delimitation of constituencies for the block declared by notification (Annex-3 to the petition published in the Gazette dated 25th November 1970 and the notification issued by the Collector (Annex-4 to the petition) dated 4/12th December 1970 determining the reserved constituencies. 2. The contention of the petitioners is that the constituencies for the block were finally declared by notification (Annex-1 to the petition) published in the Gazette dated 26th September 1969 and accordingly the petitioners among others got themselves elected to the Gram Panchayats with a view to being elected for the block Panchayat and for further elections on that basis; and that after the petitioners had been elected from the Gram Panchayats the State Government altered the constituencies of the block so that the petitioners are now unable to contest the elections for the block Panch...
Tag this Judgment!Ramnaresh Swamy Vs. State Government of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1971
Reported in: AIR1972MP86; 1972MPLJ272
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J. 1. This is a writ petition by Ramnaresh Swamy who had applied for a quarry lease in respect of minor mineral viz., 'limestone used in kilns for manufacture of lime used as building material'. This was in respect of khasra No. 346, area 1.31 acres. Respondent No. 3 H.P. Pathak had applied for a larger area, in all 33,63 acres, including this particular plot No. 346 measuring 1.31 acres. In the application of respondent No. 3 the description of the material to be quarried was mentioned as 'limestone for burning.' Since the application made by respondent No. 3 was in respect of a larger area, it could not be considered by the Director of Geology and Mining and was to be considered by the State Government while the application of the petitioner being for a smaller area was to be considered by the Director of Geology and Mining. Both these applications remained pending for more than the specified period and were, therefore, deemed rejected. The petitioner filed an app...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Volkart Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1971
Reported in: 1972MPLJ221; [1972]29STC515(MP)
R.J. Bhave, J. 1. Miscellaneous Civil Cases Nos. 212 and 213 of 1970 are also disposed of by this common judgment, as common questions of law have been referred by the Board of Revenue under Section 44 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The questions referred are :(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that there was an implied contract of sale of packing materials, i.e., bardana and patti along with the sale of cotton bales ?(2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the packing material was chargeable at the rate applicable to the said material and not at the rate applicable to the baled cotton ?(3) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in levying sales tax on packing material when the same was purchased from registered dealers of Madhya Pradesh and was sold in the course of inter-State sale ?(4) Whether, on the facts and c...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Electric Stores Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1971
Reported in: 1972MPLJ669; [1973]30STC9(MP)
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 44 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act at the instance of the assessee. The Sales Tax Officer assessed certain amount of tax and penalty on the assessee. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax on 8th May, 1964. Along with the memorandum of appeal it did not deposit the amount of tax and penalty that was imposed on it. But a direction was given to the assessee by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to deposit one-third amount, the original figure being Rs. 150. It was subsequently corrected and the amount was to be deposited by 31st July, 1965. This time was later on extended to 6th September, 1965. However, the amount was not deposited within that time, but it was actually deposited on 5th September, 1966. In the meanwhile, the appeal was not taken up for orders. The order was passed on 9th November, 1967. By that order the appeal was dismissed as the one-third amount of tax an...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. N.M. Dubash and Co.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-1971
Reported in: 1972MPLJ529; [1973]30STC118(MP)
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 44 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The assessee, M/s. N. M. Dubash & Co., is a registered dealer engaged in the manufacture and sale of lime. In the course of its business, it purchased bamboo baskets for the purpose of carrying the stone from the quarry to the kiln. The question was whether the purchase price of these baskets was liable to tax under Section 7(1) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act. The question referred is as follows :Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the bamboo baskets purchased from unregistered dealers used in carrying limestone to kilns will not attract purchase tax under Section 7(1) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958?The assessment relates to the period from 1st April, 1961, to 31st March, 1962. Entry No. 48 in Schedule I to the M.P. General Sales Tax Act was amended by Act No. 18 of 1960 with effect from 1st July, 1960, and r...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Dayarambal Chand
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-1971
Reported in: [1973]31STC249(MP)
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 44 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act. The assessee in this case filed a certificate in 'C form but in that certificate the registration number of the purchasing dealer was not mentioned. The certificate was, therefore, not taken into consideration. However, the assessee wanted an opportunity either to correct the certificate or to file a duplicate indicating the registration number of the purchasing dealer. This opportunity was not allowed and the question referred to this court is :Whether the assessing authority is required to give an opportunity to the dealer to explain errors or omissions noticed by the assessing authority in declarations in form 'C' prescribed under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, before rejecting them as invalid?2. This court has held in K. S. Nazar Ali Mills v. The Commissioner of Sales Tax, M. P. Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 175 of 1970, decided on the 27th August, 1971; Since reported at [1973] 31 S....
Tag this Judgment!Baboo Narayanlal Vs. Manoharlal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-1971
Reported in: AIR1973MP143; 1972MPLJ907
Shiv Dayal, J.1. In pursuance of my order in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 410 of 1971, Shri Jakatdar, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri R.K. Verma, learned counsel for the respondents, were heard again.2. This second appeal arises from a suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from raising a wall on his own land and for its demolition in case the defendant erects a wall. The basis of the suit was that the plaintiff had acquired easement of eavesdropping from his house for the statutory period. The defendant resisted the suit. The trial Court found that the plaintiff had acquired a right of easement and passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff restraining the defendant from making any construction in any way so as 'to affect the flow of the rain water from the plaintiff's house towards his land in suit'. The rest of the plaintiff's claim was dismissed.3. The plaintiff appealed. The learned Judge of the first appellate Court modified the decree of the trial C...
Tag this Judgment!Chandradatta Shankardatta and ors. Vs. Sanatkumar Laxman Prasad and or ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-1971
Reported in: AIR1973MP169; 1973MPLJ7
Shiv Dayal, J. 1. This second appeal arises from a suit for joint possession of 3/4th share of the appellants in the land sold in execution of a decree against their father. The suit was resisted by the purchaser and the decree-holders. The trial Court dismissed the suit not only on the merits but also holding that the suit was not competent being barred by Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The first appellate Court dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal, although it held that the suit was not barred by Section 47, Civil Procedure Code. 2. Shyamlal and Ramanuj inexecution of their decree against Shan-kardutt. father of the appellants, got attached and sold the suit lands. They were purchased by Sanatkumar (respondent No. 1). After the decree was passed against him. Shankardatta died and the execution proceeded against his sons, the appellants. When the sale took place the appellants were party to the execution proceedings. 3. After the sale, this suit was brought by the appellants. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »