Madhya Pradesh Court November 1972 Judgments
Gyasiram Kanairam Vaish Vs. Brij Bhushandas and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-1972
Reported in: AIR1973MP148; 1973MPLJ201
Shivdayal, J.1. This appeal arises from proceedings under Order 21, Rule 2, Civil Procedure Code, in the following circumstances.2. (a) In 1908, Rajabai executed a mortgage with possession in favour of Narayandas for Rs. 9,660/- in respect of the houses situate in Lohia Bazar and Dana Oli, Lashkar, Gwalior.(b) On February 18, 1946, Rajabai brought a suit against Brijbhushandas (son and legal representative of Narayandas, who died in the meantime). During the pendency of the suit, Rajabai died, leaving a will behind by virtue of which the suit property devolved on Gyasiram appellant and Sitaram, brother of Smt Vithabai (respondent No. 2). Sitaram also died. Smt. Vithabai is his heir and legal representative. (c) On February 30, 1954, a preliminary decree for redemption was passed in the above suit (No. 24 of Samvat 2006) in favour of Gyasiram and Smt Vithabai. Under this decree, a sum of Rs. 21,354/3/- as principal and Rs. 13,798/11/- as interest and further interest thereon till the da...
Tag this Judgment!Gyasiram Kaniram Vaish Vs. Brij Bhushandas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-1972
Reported in: AIR1973MP155; 1973MPLJ211
Shivdayal, J.1. This appeal arises from proceedings under Order 21, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the following circumstances.2. (a) In 1908, Rajabai executed a mortgage with possession in favour of Narayandas for Rs. 9,660/- in respect of the houses situate in Lohia Bazar and Dana Oli, Lashkar, Gwalior.(b) On February 18, 1946, Rajabai brought a suit against Brijbhushandas (son and legal representative of Narayandas, who died in the meantime). During the pendency of the suit, Rajabai died, leaving a will behind, by virtue of which the suit property devolved on Gyasiram appellant and Sitaram, brother of Smt. Vithabai (respondent No. 2). Sitaram also died. Smt. Vithabai is his heir and legal representative. (c) On February 30, 1954, a preliminary decree for redemption was passed in the above suit (No. 24 of Samvat 2006) in favour of Gyasiram and Smt. Vithabai. Under this decree, a sum of Rs. 21,354/3/- as principal and Rs. 13,798/11/- as interest and further interest thereon...
Tag this Judgment!Vrajlal Manilal and Co Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-24-1972
Reported in: [1973]92ITR287(MP); 1973MPLJ395
TARE C.J. - By order dated December 6, 1967, passed in Misc. Civil Case No. 239 of 1965, a Division Bench of this court required the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state the following question for consideration by this court under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 :'Whether there was any evidence before the Tribunal for computing the gross profit in the manner it di ?'The said reference arose on the following facts : The petitioner is a registered firm consisting of eight partners doing the business of bidi manufacture. The assessment year in question was 1957-58 and the accounting year was Samvat year 2012, ending on November 2, 1956. The petitioner-firm manufactured two brands of bidis, i.e., Nos. 22 and 207. The bidis were mostly sent from Sagar, which is the assessees head office, by railway wagons to Delhi, Agra and Lucknow. The main raw material, namely, tobacco, was imported/from Gujarat, while tendu leaves were Purchased from the forest contractors of Madhya Pr...
Tag this Judgment!Durlabhkumar Vs. the District Judge, Indore and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-1972
Reported in: AIR1973MP175; 1973MPLJ150
Oza, J.1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner against an order passed by the District Judge, Indore, directing the sale of the property of the petitioner and recovery of the amount due to the respondent No. 2.2. Respondent No. 2 filed an application before the District Judge. Indore, under Section 31 of the State-Financial Corporations Act. 1951, (hereinafter called the Act), for the sate of the property of the petitioner which-was mortgaged as security for a loan advanced by the respondent to the petitioner. It was alleged that according to the terms of the agreement the petitioner was required to pay off this amount in five equal yearly Instalments starting from 1st March 1965. There was also a term for Payment of interest which was to be a half-yearly payment. and in case of default respondent No. 2 was entitled to recover the whole amount. It is alleged that after the payment of the first instalment, the petitioner paid some amount against the second instalment. But ther...
Tag this Judgment!S.P. Manocha and anr. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1972
Reported in: AIR1973MP84; 1973MPLJ344
Verma, J.1. Petitioner No. 2 is the daughter of petitioner No. 1. She had applied for admission to one of the Medical Colleges in the State for the M. B. B. S. course commencing this year. She has not been admitted. Hence this petition claiming a writ of mandamus against the respondents to admit her to one of the Medical Colleges in the State.2. The total number of seats to be filled this year in several Medical Colleges in the State was fixed, admittedly, at 720 in all. Later on. 10 more seats were increased in the Rewa Medical College for the sons and daughters of freedom fighters, but we are not concerned with these additional seats in the present case. A fixed percentage of seats out of the total number was reserved for some specified categories so that the final division of these 720 seats was made as follows:(1) General category441seats(2) Scheduled Castes108'(3) Scheduled Tribes108'(4) Freedom Fighters21'(5) Military Personnel21'(6) Govt. of India nominees21'Total720 seats3. The...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Jhankar Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1972
Reported in: AIR1973MP274; 1973MPLJ286
Shiv Dayal, J. 1. On the vesting of the Malguzari villages under the M. P. Abolition of Proprietary Rights Act, 1950 (No. 1 of 1951) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), on September 28/29, 1951, the Conservator of Forests. Eastern Circle, put to auction the right to propagate and collect lac in five malguzari forests in district Balaghat. They were leased out to Jhankar Singh (Plaintiff) for Rs. 98,500/-. The lease was from September 29, 1951 to June 30. 1954. It is not now in dispute that the plaintiff worked the contract. Although it is his case that possession was not formally given to him, he says 1hat he worked the contracts, out of a sense of duty over some of the portions of leased forests. According to him, the period for which he worked the contract was from November 24, 1951, to May 26, 1952, during which period he collected lac weighing 337 maunds worth Rs. 16,290/-, which gave him a net profit of Rs. 8087/5/6. According to the plaintiff, he did not work the contract, nor ...
Tag this Judgment!Nemichand Vs. Brahma Swaroop and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1972
Reported in: (1973)ILLJ481MP; 1973MPLJ135
ORDERG.L. Oza, J.1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner against an order of his dismissal from service in the Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation (hereinafter called the Corporation), Indore.2. According to the petitioner, he was appointed Class-A officer of the Corporation with the approval of the Board of Directors by an order dated the 25th June, I960, and he was working as a Superintendent in the Corporation. On 17th May, 1968 he was given a notice to show cause why disciplinary action under Regulation 40 of the M. P. Financial Corporation (Staff) Regulations, 1958, should not be taken against him on the basis of certain charges pertaining to bis joining an unrecognized association of Class-B and Class-C staff of the Corporation and also his having accepted to be its office-bearer and taking part in the activities of that association resorting to cessation of work. The petitioner submitted his reply to this show cause notice. According to the petitioner he was further given...
Tag this Judgment!Ail Das Vs. Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-02-1972
Reported in: AIR1973MP130
P.K. Tare, C.J.1. This is a Writ petition under Arliclcs 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by a purchaser of a house in the city of Bilaspur from the predecessor of the fourth respondent, by a registered sale deed, dated 26-9-1962. The predecessor of the fourth respondent, namely, Diwan Mahabir Sewak Singh, an ex-Zamin-dar, was a member of the scheduled tribe. The alienation was challenged by the third respondent under Section 170 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, for avoiding the transfer, which Wits said to be in contravention of Section 165 (6) of the said Code. It was alleged that the husband of the fourth respondent was a Malik-makbuza holder of a plot of 0.05 acres of Nazul sheet No. 17 of Mohalla Dabripara in Bilaspur town, which he had sold to the petitioner by a registered sale deed and the alienation was liable to be avoided on the ground that the petitioner-purchaser was not a member of the scheduled tribe. It was also alleged in the application that no sanction o...
Tag this Judgment!Swaroop Chand JaIn Vs. the District Superintendent of Police and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-02-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1038; 1973MPLJ219
J.S. Verma, J.1. This petition is directed against the action of the District Superintendent of Police, Chhatarpur, respondent No. 1, in opening a history sheet of the petitioner and placing him under surveillance. Accordingly, a writ of certiorari is sought. The petitioner also claims that the respondents be restrained from continuing this action against the petitioner.2. The petitioner is a resident of Chhatarpur and, apart from being a businessman, he lays claim to being a respectable inhabitant of that place by virtue of his holding several elective posts there. According to the petitioner, one Somchand, also of Chhat-tarpwr, has in respect of an incident alleged te have occurred on 8th April, 1970, filed a complaint against respondents Nos, 3 and 5 for having committed alleged offences under Sections 392, 323, 341 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, which complaint is pending in the Court of Magistrate First Class, Chhatarpur and in which the petitioner is cited by the complainan...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›