Madhya Pradesh Court March 1972 Judgments
Rameshchandra Vs. G.N. Tandon and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1972
Reported in: AIR1974MP1; 1973MPLJ819
S.P. Bhargava, J.1. The facts leading to the presentation of this petition by Rameshchandra Bahoti may be briefly stated thus. The petitioner is admittedly a registered graduate of the University of Indore. He passed his M. Com. Degree Examination in the year 1967. In that very year, Shri Vaishnav Arts & Commerce College. Indore, also called as Shri Vaishnav College of Commerce, was started at Indore in the month of August. The petitioner received a let-ter (Annexure A) from the Joint Secretary of the said College in which it wasrequested that he may at his convenience and according to his aptitude deliver some lectures to the students of that college. By his reply dated 3rd August, 1967 (also marked Annexure A) the petitioner accepted the said offer in these words:'It is really very kind of you to extend an invitation for delivering a few lectures to the students. I shall be happy to do so subject to the limitations of time and according to my convenience.' 2-3. Annexure R-2 filed wit...
Tag this Judgment!Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel and Co. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1972
Reported in: [1973]30STC1(MP)
ORDERShiv Dayal, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the assessment order dated 1st April, 1968, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jabalpur, imposing a penalty under Section 8(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, (hereinafter called the Act), and for directions to restrain the respondents from taking action under the said Section 8(2) in future. The petitioner's contention is that Section 8(2) is ultra vires the Constitution as it infringes the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) and is also violative of articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution.2. Section 6 of the Act provides for imposition of sales tax and section. 7 provides for purchase tax. Section 8 (as it stood at the relevant time) enacted as follows :8. Rate of tax for raw material. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 6 or Section 7 but subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be prescribed, the rate of tax payable on the s...
Tag this Judgment!Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, Jabalpur Vs. the State of Madhya Pra ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1972
Reported in: AIR1972MP188; (1973)ILLJ266MP; 1972MPLJ939
Naik, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for certain reliefs under the Motor Transport Workers Act (Act No. 27 of 1961), hereinafter called 'the Act'.2. The petitioner alleges--(1) That it is a statutory corporation constituted for the whole of the State of Madhya Pradesh under Section 5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act. 1948.(2) That in 1961 the Parliament of India enacted an Act known as the Motor Transport Workers Act (Act No. 27 of 1961) in order to provide for the welfare of Motor Transport workers and to regulate the conditions of their work.(3) That the said Act was made applicable to the State of Madhya Pradesh from 28-6-1963 whereupon the State of Madhya Pradesh has framed rules under the said Act known as the Madhya Pradesh Motor Transport Workers Rules, 1963.(4) That under Section 2(e) of the Act. 'motor transport undertaking' means a motor transport undertaking engaged in carrying passengers or goods or both by road for hire or rew...
Tag this Judgment!Shujat Ali Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1972
Reported in: AIR1972MP151; 1972CriLJ1193
Naik, J.1. The order in this case shall govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 75 of 1972 and Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 76 of 1972.2. These are all applications for certificate of fitness for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution.3. Brig. Rajendrasingh was Sub-Area Commander, Jabalpur from 28-4-1962. From 1-9-1963. he officiated as Area Commander, Jabalpur till 4-10-1963 when he was transferred out of Jabalpur. He was retired from service in December 1964.4. Major Shujat Ali was at the relevant time a Captain in the Signals Training Centre, Jabalpur. He was attached to HQ, Sub-Area on 1-8-1962 for Pre-staff College Training. He remained attached to the HQ Area till 17-10-1963.5. In October 1962. Brie.Rajendrasingh had opened a fund for thewelfare of troops, known as 'SpecialTroops Welfare Fund'. The capital forthe fund was raised by organizing fetes,raffles, etc. Major Shujatali (then Capt.Shujatali) was appointed a Recei...
Tag this Judgment!Hastimal Bheroolal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1972
Reported in: AIR1972MP214; 1972MPLJ660
Oza, J. This reference has been made by a Division Bench and the question referred to is-- . 'Whether the State Government was denuded of its power to hear second appeals after the notification delegating powers to hear second appeals under Section 77 to the Board of Revenue was issued and consequently, the exercise of power to hear the second appeal by the State Government alter the notification was without jurisdiction and thus illegal?' 2. The relevant facts giving rise to this reference are that the Slate Pencil Producers' Marketing Co-operative Society Ltd., Mandsaur, which is a co-operative society registered under the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act. 1960, (hereinafter called the Act), was served on 3rd December 1966 with a notice of supersession under Section 53 (2) of the Act by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. An order was made on the same day under Section 53 (10) of the Act directing that no order or resolution passed by the Working Committee of the Societ...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Bihari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1673; 1973MPLJ590
ORDERA.P. Sen, J.1. This order will also govern the disposal of Misc. Criminal Case No. 32 of 1972 (Kailash Dubey v-State of M. P.)These are two petitions under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the judgment and sentences passed by me in Criminal Appeal No. 608 of 1969 (Awadesh Singh v. The State of M. P.). decided on 27-10-1971.2. Having heard the Parties at a considerable length. I have formed the opinion that these petitions must be dismissed. In my view, the petitioners have chosen a wrong forum for the redress of their grievances, if any. Their remedy lay by way of an appeal to the Supreme Court of India.3. Three questions arise for considerations in these petitions namely:-(1) Whether the High Court has any jurisdiction to review its judgment or sentences in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure?(2) Whether the judgment and sentences passed by me in appeal were a nullity, having regard to the provisio...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Indra Kumari Vs. Rajkumar Mahant
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1556; 1973MPLJ529
ORDERT.P. Naik, J.1. The petitioner is the married wife of the non-applicant. On 3-2-1964, she obtained an order of maintenance in her favour from the Magistrate, First Class, Jabalpur, under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the rate of Rs. 100.00 per month.2. On or about 9-1-1964, the non-applicant husband filed a petition for judicial separation against his wife, the petitioner, under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the allegeation that she had deserted him without sufficient cause. The petition was dismissed by the trial Court; but, on appeal, First Appeal No. 48 of 1965, the High Court on 8-9-1969 allowed the petition and granted to the non-applicant husband a decree for judicial separation holding that the petitioner wife had deserted her husband without reasonable cause.3. The non-applicant husband, therefore, on or about 16-2-1970, applied in the Court of the Magistrate under Section 489 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of the order ...
Tag this Judgment!Fatte Vs. Banshilal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-1972
Reported in: AIR1974MP16; 1973MPLJ617
T.P. Naik, J. 1. The suit of the plaintiff-appellant for possession of 2.75 acres of land situate in mouza Mahul Jhop-di, tahsil Rajnandgaon, district Durg, has been dismissed by the District Judge, Durg, at Rajnandgaon, reversing the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Class I, Rajnandgaon, decreeing the suit.2. The suit of the plaintiff-appellant was based, inter alia, on the following allegations.That the suit land was formerly part of Khasra No. 43, area 6.45 acres, and Khasra No. 57/1, area 0.30 acre; it was situate in what was formerly the Princely State of Rajnandgaon; and that it was owned andpossessed by then proprietor ekyxqtkjRandhirsingh as his 'sir'; that after the coming into force of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals,Alienated Lands) Act, 1950 (No. I of 1951),the land, being the home-farm of theex-proprietor, was saved to him; that by aregistered deed of sale, dated 12-6-1952,(Ex. P-17) the said ex-proprietor sold thesuit fields, Kha...
Tag this Judgment!Pooranchand Ved Prakash Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-1972
Reported in: 1972MPLJ772; [1973]31STC170(MP)
ORDERS.M.N. Raina, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.2. The case of the petitioner is as follows: The petitioner purchased house No. 17 in Topi Bazar, Lashkar, from Narain Das, Phul Bai and sons of Narain Das for a consideration of Rs. 31,000 by a registered sale deed dated 17th June, 1969 (annexure 1). The purchase according to him was bona fide and for consideration. The house was, however, attached by the Sales Tax Officer-cum-Additional Tahsildar, Gwalior, on 23rd September, 1969, in proceedings for recovery of sales tax against Narain Das. According to the petitioner, he was not at all aware that any sales tax proceedings were going on or that Narain Das was an assessee and was in arrears of tax. The petitioner submitted an objection petition in respect of the attachment of the house before the Sales Tax Officer, but it was dismissed by order dated 23rd December, 1969 (annexure 2). The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Of...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Saleha Bi Vs. Sheikh Gulla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1972
Reported in: AIR1973MP207
A.P. Sen, J.1. In this case, the learned Additional District Judge has non-suited the appellant-plaintiff on the ground firstly, that the presumption of death of Ghulam Murtuza cannot be drawn under Section 108 of the Evidence Act; and secondly, even if the presumption of death arises, she after the death of her brother, Mohd. Ishaq, became a co-owner along with his widow Mst, Nishat Bi alias Hidayat Bi.2. Having heard the parties, I have formed the opinion that the appeal must be allowed. The view taken by the learned Additional District Judge can hardly be supported. He has refused to draw the presumption under Section 108 of the Evidence Act on the ground that Mst. Saleha Bi (P. W. 1), the plaintiff herself, has in para 7 of her cross-examination was not able to state categorically whether her father Ghulam Murtuza Was really dead or still alive within 30 years of the date of filing of the suit. The learned Additional District Judge failed to appreciate that Section 108 is in the na...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »