Madhya Pradesh Court August 1975 Judgments
Balubhai Hirji Gajjar and ors. Vs. Sureshkumar Nathuram and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-1975
Reported in: AIR1977MP58; 1977MPLJ279
Dwivedi, J.1. These two appeals Misc. First Appeal No. 48/67, (Balubhai v. Smt. Sarjubai) and Misc. First Appeal No. 103/67, (Smt. Sarjubai v. Balabhai) arise out of the award dated 2-5-1967 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Gwalior. They are, therefore, consolidated and the Judgment in Misc. First Appeal No. 48/67 shall govern the disposal of both these appeals.2. The Accidents Claims Tribunal, by award 2-5-1967, decreed a claim of Rs. 5,000.00 in favour of Shrimati Sarju-bai and others against Balubhai (car owner), Switzerland General Insurance Co. (Insurer) and Dattu (car driver). The claims Tribunal discharged Nanabhai, Manilal and Union Fire and General Insurance Co. It was directed that the Insurance Co. would be principally liable for payment of the compensation amount.3. Misc. First Appeal No. .48/67 was preferred by Balubhai and others against the award of compensation of Rs. 5,000.00. In this appeal, the appellants challenged the finding of rash and negligent driving fay...
Tag this Judgment!Ramhet and anr. Vs. Mandir Shri LaxminaraIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1975
Reported in: AIR1976MP216
Shiv Dayal, J.1. At the instance of Mandir Shri Laxminarain, respondent No. 1 (hereinafter called the respondent-Mandir), proceeding started on July 27, 1964, in the court of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sabalgarh, district Morena, under Section 168(4) of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, (hereinafter called the Code) for the ejectment of Fosuram, who died during the pendency of these proceedings, and whose legal representatives are the petitioners, Ramhet and Raghu-nandan alias Raghunath. The applicants' case was that the non-applicant Fosuram was a sub-lessee. By notice, he was asked to desist from culivation from July 1, 1964 after cutting the Rabi crop. The application was resisted by the non-applicants.2. The Sub-Divisional Officer, by his order dated December 6, 1966 directed ejectment of the non-applicants. They appealed. By his order dated June 22, 1966. the Collector allowed the appeal and dismissed the application. The respondent-Mandir preferred a second appeal, which was al...
Tag this Judgment!R.M.E. Works Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1975
Reported in: [1976]38STC306(MP)
P.K. Tare, C.J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of Misc. Civil Case No. 347 of 1973, Misc. Civil Case No. 348 of 1973, Misc. Civil Case No. 349 of 1973 and Misc. Civil Case No. 350 of 1973 also.2. These are references under Section 44(1) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, wherein the following questions have been referred to this court for our opinion. In Misc. Civil Case No. 347 of 1973, Misc. Civil Case No. 348 of 1973, Misc. Civil Case No. 349 of 1973 and Misc. Civil Case No. 346 of 1973, the following two questions have been referred :(1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in view of the Tribunal's finding that the tractors sold by the assessee were designed and manufactured for agricultural purposes, but were used by the purchaser for non-agricultural purposes also though only in a small fraction of cases of the total sales whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the tractors sold by the assessee were not entitled to be treated as agricultu...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Tiwari Vs. R.K. Shukla, Dy. Collector and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ271
A.P. Sen, J.1. This Order shall also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Petition No. 728 of 1975 (Shivkumar Baipai v. The District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon and Miscellaneous Petition No. 729 of 1975 (Lai Shyam Shah v. The District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon).These three petitions by the petitioners who have been detained by orders of the District Magistrate, Rajanandgaon, raise a common question and, therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.2. The short point raised by the petitioners is that after the promulgation of the Maintenance of Internal Security (Amendment) Ordinance, 1975 (No. 4 of 1975) by the President on 29th June, 1975, two courses were open to the detaining authority (i) to exercise the power of detention conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act, or (ii) to make a declaration in terms of subsection (3) of the newly inserted Section 16A. They further contend that the declaration thereunder, has to be made at the time of the making of the order of det...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, Contemner
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1766
R.K. Tankha, J.1. The present contempt proceedings against contemner, Arun Kshetrapal, District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, arise out of his refusal to comply with this Court's order dated 1-8-1975 in a pending habeas corpus petition and as a consequence of a crash wireless message dated 6-8-1975 addressed by him to the Registrar of this Court in that connection.2. A detenu, Vidhya Bhushan Thakur, has challenged the validity of his detention passed by the contemner under Section 3(1)(a) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971, in the habeas corpus petition (M. P. No. 700 of 1975) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which the contemner is a party as respondent No. 1. This Court vide its order dated 1-8-1975 in that petition had directed production of the detenu in Court on 8-8-1975 which was the date of hearing. But the contemner vide his crash wireless message dated 6-8-1975 addressed to the Advocate-General and a copy to the Registrar of this Court, expressed his ...
Tag this Judgment!Dinkar Prabhakar Mahajan Vs. S.L. Agrawal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1975
Reported in: AIR1976MP40
M.L. Malik, J.1. This is a hard case. The petitioner, who was prosecuting his studies in the IIIrd year of the M.B.-B.S. course in the Medical College, Rai-pur received a letter on 16-9-1972 (An-nexure 9) from the Dean that his admission to the M.B.B.S. course had been cancelled because he had not taken Physics as a subject in his B.Sc. (Part I) examination and was, therefore, not qualified to appear in the Pre-medical examination held in the year 1970, to which examination he was wrongly admitted. The petitioner rushed to this Court for a writ of certiorari to quash the letter (Annexure 9) cancelling his admission to the medical courses and expelling him from the College. This Court gave an ad interim writ directing that the petitioner be allowed to prosecute his studies, the results of his M.B.B.S. terms to be declared after the final order in the writ petition was pronounced. The petitioner is now in the Vth year and would shortly be appearing in the final M.B.B.S. examination.2. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Chhoglal Vs. Idol of Bhagwan Shri Satyanarayan Through Pujari Kamaldas ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1975
Reported in: AIR1976MP5
Singh, J.1. This appeal was first heard by Bachawat, J. sitting singly. He found difficulty in reconciling two Division Bench decisions of this Court on the construction of Section 13 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommo-dation Control Act, 1961. These Division Bench cases are : Firm Ganeshram Harivilas v. Ramchandra 1970 MPTJ 902 = (AIR 1971 Madh Pra 104) and Jivrambhai v. Amarsingh 1972 MPTJ 785 = (AIR 1973 Madh Pra 165). The learned Judge, therefore referred to a Division Bench the following question of law;'Whether the operation of Section 13(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 is arrested so far as the deposit of rent according to it, is concerned and it remains in suspense until the Court fixes a provisional rent since when the dispute is raised by the defendant-tenant in his written statement, or it would be so since when the defendant-tenant makes an application inviting the attention of the Court to the specific dispute and asks the Courts to fix the provisional ...
Tag this Judgment!Chandroji Rao Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1975
Reported in: AIR1976MP119
Shiv Dayal, J. 1. By this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution the petitioner, Col. Sardar Angre, has sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Commissioner dated Dec. 14, 1962, and the order of the Board of Revenue, dated Sep. 22, 1969, and a writ of mandamus directing the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Commissioner not to deduct the amount of Rs. 1,33,897/8/3 from the amount of compensation payable to him under the M. B. Abolition of Jagirs Act, 1951, and to enhance the compensation to the extent of Rs. 3,738/- (being 7 times of Rs. 534/- representing the Tanka of village Bhaisakhedi).2. The petitioner Col. Sardar Angre was a Jagirdar of Tahsil Nevri Bhorasa and Panbihar in the erstwhile Gwalior State. In 1948, by merger of several princely State, a new State of Madhya Bharat was constituted. Under the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the Abolition Act), the petitioner's Jagir was resumed on December 4, 1952, under ...
Tag this Judgment!Bharatsingh Vs. Rishi Kumar and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-1975
Reported in: AIR1977MP40
S.M.N. Raina, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 8 of the Partition Act. 2. It is not disputed that the house in suit which is situated in Gopalganj, Sagar, originally belonged to the joint Hindu family. The plaintiff-respondent purchased 1/5th share of Rishikumar, appellant No. 1, one of the members of the family at a Court auction in 1960. Thereafter the plaintiff filed a suit for partition and for possession of his 1/5th share against the appellants and certain other members of the family. The suit was decreed and a preliminary decree for partition was passed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent. During the proceedings for final decree, the appellants and some others filed an application under Section 4 of the Partition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for purchasing the share of the plaintiff. This application was opposed by the plaintiff-respondent and was dismissed by the trial Court in appeal, the learned Additional District Judge set aside the order of the trial C...
Tag this Judgment!Nirmal Chand JaIn Vs. the District Magistrate, Jabalpur and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1975
Reported in: AIR1976MP95
Sen, J.1. By this petition -under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner Shri Nirmal Chand Jain, who has been detained by an order of the District Magistrate, Jabalpur, dated 26-6-1975 under Section 3(1)(a)(ii) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971, makes a grievance that though he was classified as a Class I detenu, he was being deprived of the facilities to which he was entitled, i.e., the facilities and amenities provided to prisoners placed in Class 'A' under the Jail Manual and, accordingly, seeks appropriate writ or direction against the District Magistrate and Superintendent, Central Jail, Jabalpur.2. The allegations made by the petitioner, briefly are that he along withseveral doctors, advocates and other prominent citizens of Jabalpur were being detained at the Central Jail, Jabalpur. His allegation is that these detenus though classified as Class 'A' prisoners, were being denied reasonable living comforts and were being kept in a barrack in deplorable con...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »