Madhya Pradesh Court April 1971 Judgments
Ramlal Vs. Kanhaiyalal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-1971
Reported in: AIR1973MP97; 1972MPLJ805
Shiv Dayal, J. 1. This second appeal arises from a suit for partition instituted by the purchaser of the undivided interest of a member of a Hindu coparcenery.2. Briefly stated, the material facts are that Ramtal appellant obtained a money decree against Manakchand (defendant No. 2). In execution of that decree, he purchased the undivided interest of Manakcband in the properly of Hindu coparcenery comprising of Manakcband, his father Kanhaiyalal and bis brother Ganeshilal. In the execution proceedings, objections were filed under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil Procedure Code, by Kanhaiyalal, Ganeshilal and Mst. Jasodabai, wife of Kanhaiyalal. The objections were dismissed. A suit under Order 21, Rule 63, Civil Procedure Code, was also instituted but it was dismissed. Sale certificate was issued to the plaintiff on March 15, 1955.3. Ramlal then brought the present suit for partition of the house and separate possession of its 1/3rd share. He also claimed mesne profits, Rs. 60/-, and future me...
Tag this Judgment!Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Mst. Basa ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ273MP; 1971MPLJ706
G.P. Singh, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants against whom a decree for payment of Rs. 21,500 has been passed by the Fifth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, in favour of the plaintiffs-respondents under Section 1A of the Fatal Accidents Act.2. The facts giving rise to the appeal are that one Chunnilal was a driver in the employment of Central Provinces Transport Services (C.P.T.S.). The C.P.T.S. was owned and run by the State Government till the formation of the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation in 1962 under the provisions of Section 3 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950. There were serious communal riots in September, 1956. During that period curfew was imposed and no person could move during curfew hours except under a pass issued by the District Authorities. On September 16, 1956, Chunnilal started from his house in the morning at about 6 O' clock for going to the Jabalpur depot of the C.P.T.S. for joining his duty. He had been given a curfew pass. B...
Tag this Judgment!Panchamsingh Vs. Ramkishandas Guru Ramdas and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1972MP14; 1971MPLJ745
Sen, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against an order under Section 248 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, for the eviction of the petitioner from 199 Bighas 11 Biswas of Muafi lands on the ground that he is in unauthorised occupation thereof.2. The material facts, shortly stated, are as follows: There is a temple of Shri Ramji and Shri Hanumanji situate in Gangabai-ka-Bagicha in Dholpur on the Gwalior-Agra road. During the mutiny of 1857, Maharaja Jayajirao Scindia of Gwalior halted at Dholpur while on his way to Agra and was pleased to endow 300 Bighas of lands in muafi for the upkeep of the temple by a Sanad. The muafi grant was resumed in the year 1939, by the Gwalior Darbar, and the former Pujari, Mahant Dwarkadas, was granted a Parwana under Section 13 of the Kawaid Maufidaran, in respect of 199 Bighas 11 Biswas of Muafi lands. On 15-6-1949, Thakur Murlidharsingh, the father of the petitioner, obtained the lands on a sub-lease...
Tag this Judgment!Gyarsibai and ors. Vs. Jamnalal Moolchand and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1971
Reported in: AIR1973MP75; 1973MPLJ188
S.R. Vyas, J. 1. This second appeal arises out of an appellate decree passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Indore, whereby a decree for partition passed by the Court of the Civil Judge Class II, Indore had been confirmed. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are as under: The parties are related to each other as shown below:-- Gyarsibai = Moolchand = Shakarbai (deft. 1) (died in 1948) (deft. 4) __________________|______________________ ______ |_______________ __________________|_______________ | | | |Devising Dindayal Jamnalal Nemchand(deft. 2) (deft. 3) (plaintiff) (deft. 5)According to the plaintiff, his father Moolchand died in 1948 and was at the time of his death survived by two widows--Gyarsibai and Shakarbai and four sons, namely, -- Devisingh and Dindayal (by Gyarsibai), and Jamnalal and Nemchand (by Shakarbai), all of whom are parties to the present litigation. During his lifetime, Moolchand was the owner of house No. 1, street No. 6 Pardeshipura,...
Tag this Judgment!Hatesingh Munnalal Vs. Kishan Saligram and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1971
Reported in: AIR1973MP172; 1973MPLJ175
ORDERS.R. Vyas, J.1. The plaintiff-non-applicants instituted a suit against the applicant on the allegations that on 17-5-1964 accounts were settled between them and the defendant; that an amount of Rs. 7237/- was found due from the plaintiffs to the defendant; that for the payment of this amount the plaintiffs had mortgaged with possession suit lands with the defendant as Per document of that date; that the aforesaid land was mortgaged with possession with the defendant for a period of 8 years as a mode of repayment of the aforesaid amount; that this transaction was against the provisions of the M. P. Land Revenue Code and that in spiteof the defendant being called upon to restore the possession of the suit lands, the defendant has not done so.2. The defendant in his written statement denied the allegations made in the plaint and alleged that the relations of a landlord and tenant subsists between the plaintiffs and himself; that the suit lands were leased to him for a period of 8 yea...
Tag this Judgment!Bishwa Nath Gupta and ors. Vs. Munna
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1971
Reported in: AIR1971MP238; 1971MPLJ721
Singh, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act from an award of Rs. 20,000/-made against the appellants by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rewa. 2. The relevant facts are that Munna, the respondent, suffered bodily injuries on November 9, 1962 by the impact of a truck which was driven by the appellant No. 2 Munnilal Gupta. The truck was owned by the appellant No. 1 Bishwanath Gupta and was insured with the appellant No. 3, the New India General Insurance Company. The accident took place at about 4.30 p.m. on the main market road of Harpalpur. The road runs from west to east through the market and on each side of the road are houses. The house of Munna is on the light side of the road. The truck was moving from west to east. Munna was hit in front of his house by the truck. As a result of the impact, Munna suffered serious Injuries on his left leg. The flesh and skin were peeled off and bones became visible. He was first locally treated and then was re...
Tag this Judgment!Dularam Khubchand and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1971
Reported in: 1972MPLJ637
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J. 1. This is plaintiffs' second appeal.2. The plaintiffs were the consignees of 13 bales of cloth out of which only 10 bales were delivered to them on 119th August 1961. Thus there was a shortage of three bales. The plaintiffs therefore filed a suit on 19th October 1962 for the recovery of the price and the loss in respect of these three bales. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground of limitation, but held that the non-delivery of three bales was due to the misconduct of railway servants. It also held that if the suit had been within limitation then the plaintiffs would have been entitled to the price of these three bales namely Rs. 2,893.63 P., but not to any profit on these three bales. In appeal by the plaintiffs only the question of limitation was agitated, regarding which the first appellate court agreeing with the trial court held that the suit was barred by limitation. According to the court below, limitation for filing the suit would start from 18...
Tag this Judgment!Diwan Durag Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1971
Reported in: AIR1972MP12; 1971MPLJ779
Pandey, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal against the dismissal of their suit for a declaration that they have a right to divert sufficient water of a nala through artificial channels by constructing temporary dams across the nala to irrigate some 60 acres of their land, for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from doing any act calculated to diminish the quantity of water thus required and for Rs. 4,000/- as damages for the loss caused to them by the wrongful interference of the defendants in the year 1963-64.2. It is common ground that the plaintiffs were proprietors of village Zinda where they held 60 acres of sir and khudkast lands as detailed in paragraph 1 of the plaint. These lands are now held in Bhumiswami rights. Through the village area courses from south to north a nala called Belia Nala. It is not now disputed that at point EFGH, the State Government constructed in the year 1950-51 a regulator across the nala in pursuance of a scheme for providing irrigation ...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmandas Ganeshram Vs. Smt. Barfi Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1971
Reported in: AIR1972MP73; 1972MPLJ15
Raina, J.1. This is a reference by Shivdayal, J., in a Second Appeal arising out of an application by the landlord under Section 10 of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for fixation of standard rent.2. The appellant Laxmandas has been occupying the shop in suit as a tenant of the respondent Mst. Barfi Bai on a monthly rent of Rs. 55/- per month. The respondent filed an application before the Rent Controlling Authority under Section 10 of the Act for fixation of standard rent. Her case was that the monthly rent of the shop on 1-1-1948 was Rs. 61/- per month while the house-tax of the entire building of which the shop in suit was a part was Rs. 16/- on 1-1-1948. The tax had since been raised to Rs. 74.50 P. The respondent claimed that the standard rent shouldbe fixed at Rs. 104.69 P. per month by allowing an increase of 70 per cent under Section 7 of the Act. The application was dismissed by the Rent Controlling Authority Being aggrieved there...
Tag this Judgment!Lalchand Ramchand Vs. Pyare Dasrath Chamar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1971
Reported in: AIR1971MP245; 1971MPLJ672
Singh, J. 1. This Is a plaintiff's appeal against a decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Panna, dismissing his suit. 2. The facts are that the plaintiff filed the suit giving rise to this appeal on November 20, 1966, against the defendants on the allegations that on November 24, 1966, they approached the plaintiff for obtaining a loan of Rupees 14.717.68 for the purpose of depositing Government royalty and sales-tax in respect of a diamond. The defendants promised that after depositing the amount of royalty and sales-tax, they will deposit the diamond with the plaintiff as a pledge and will pay interest at the rate of 2 per cent per month on the amount of loan. The plaintiff agreed to these terms and a sum of Rs. 14,717.68 was got deposited by him in the State Bank towards the payment of royalty and sales-tax on behalf of the defendants. By virtue of this deposit, the defendants got possession of the diamond, but they did not deliver the same as pledge of the plaintiff. This...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »