Madhya Pradesh Court January 1977 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Vijaysingh and anr. Vs. Competent Authority, Sub-divisional Officer, T ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1977
Reported in: AIR1978MP72
Oza, J.1. This reference has been made by a learned single Judge of this Court and the questions that are referred to us are:(1) Whether the Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit independently of Sub-section (4) of Section 11 of the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act 1960?(2) Whether for preferring an objection under Sub-section (3) of Section 11 of the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act 1960, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would be applicable in view of the provisions contained in Section 29 (2) of the Limitation Act (No. 36 of 1963)?2. The facts giving rise to the present reference in brief are that proceedings under Section 11 of the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Ceiling Act') were initiated against the appellants. A draft statement was notified as contemplated in Sub-section (3) of Section 11 by the Competent Authority. No objection to the draft statement had been made on behal...
Manoj Kumar Mundi and anr. Vs. Hari Gopal Rao Devasthale and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978MP29
S.R. Vyas, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the award made by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Case No, 11/1975 dated 8th July, 1976.2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to this appeal are these:--The appellant 1 Manoj Kumar is the minor son of appellant 2 Keshavrao. An application under Section 110-A of the Act was filed by the appellants before the Tribunal on the following allegations :--On 30-1-1975 two trailers bearing registration Nos. MPW 5234 and 5192 belonging to some of the respondents were parked on a public lane known as 'Jatar Sahab-ki-Gali' in the town of Lashkar in such a negligent manner that one trailer was placed over the other in a tilting position At about 10.15 A.M. when the appellant Manoj Kumar a minor boy aged, about 10 years, passed by the side of these two trailers placed in the above position, one of the trailers bearing registration No. MPW ...
Smt. Usha Devi and anr. Vs. Kailash NaraIn Dixit and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978MP24; 1977MPLJ311
Dwivedi, J. 1. This is a petition by the two petitioners Shrimati Usha Devi Dixit and Raviprakash Dixit, mother and father respectively, for a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce their son Manish Dixit alias Babloo aged about 41/2 years and for his custody to them. 2. The petitioners' case is this: They were married according to Hindu rites at Kanpur on 3-7-1971. Out of their wedlock, Manish Dixit was born on 17-6-1972 and was living with the petitioners. Respondents 1 and 2 are the father and uncle of petitioner No. 2 who is living separate from them since 1967. The petitioners are living with Reva-shanker Dixit at Sehora since 20-6-1967. On 8-11-1976, at 8.30 p.m., the respondents, armed with lathis, entered inside the house of the petitioners and forcibly took away their son Manish Dixit alias Babloo in spite of their protests and against their wishes. Since then, their minor son is living with the respondents. The petitioners approached the police and the Sub...
Radheshyam Gupta Vs. Smt. Laxmi Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-14-1977
Reported in: AIR1977MP271; 1977MPLJ259
Singh, J.1. This is an appeal by the husband against an order dated 26th July 1976 by which the trial court has allowed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 100 per month to the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. By the same order, the trial Court has also allowed Rs. 200 for expenses of the suit.2. Shri Jha, learned counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection before us that this appeal is not maintainable in view of the amendments made in the Hindu Marriage Act by Act 68 of 1976. Act 68 of 1976 came into force on 27th May, 1976. Section 28, as amended by this Act, does not provide for any appeal against an order made under Section 24. The application under Section 24 in this case was, however, made sometime in 1975 before coming into force of the amending Act. Section 28 as it then stood permitted an appeal against all decrees and orders and, therefore, an order made under Section 24 was then appealable. It is well settled that the right of appeal accrues o...
Shiladevi Vs. Bharosilal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-1977
Reported in: AIR1977MP269; 1977MPLJ186
ORDERC.M. Lodha, J.1. This revision application by the plaintiff is directed against the order of the Second Additional District Judge, Gwalior empowered to exercise the powers of Small Cause Court. By the said order, the learned Judge held that the suit was not triable by the Small Cause Court as it was a suit for recovery of interest due on a mortgage and in this view of the matter he dismissed the suit.2. The plaintiff's case is that the house in question was mortgaged with him by the defendants and the possession of the same was also delivered to him. He goes on to state that after taking possession of the house he leased it out to the defendants on a monthly rent of Rs. 200 after getting a rent note Ex. P-1 executed in his favour. The defendant is alleged to have paid the rent up to Feb. 1970 but not thereafter. Consequently the plaintiff brought the present suit for the arrears of rent from Feb. 1970 to June 1970.3. The defendants resisted the suit inter alia on the ground that t...
Bhagwantrao Deorao Patil Vs. Mohammad Khan Asgar Khan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1977
Reported in: AIR1977MP270; 1977MPLJ290
ORDERC.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a plaintiff's revision against the judgment and decree dated 23rd September, 1971 by the Second Additional District Judge, Gwalior exercising the powers of Small Cause Court.2. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 700 principal and Rs. 300 interest, total Rs. 1,000 on the basis of the suit document dated 18-9-1966 Ex. P-1. It is not in dispute before me that the document in question was executed by the defendants for consideration. The only question canvassed before me is whether the suit for the whole of the principal amount is within limitation because the lower court has decreed the suit for Rs. 70 only in respect of what has been described by it as the lastinstalment 3. In order to appreciate the point of limitation argued before me it would be proper to narrate the conditions regarding repayment contained in the bond Ex. P-1:--(1) that the amount shall be paid within ten months, (2) the monthly interest on the amount will be Rs. 11 and this ...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Gangaram Bhagwandas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1977
Reported in: AIR1977MP215; 1977MPLJ318
ORDERC.M. Lodha, J. 1. This is a revision by the defendant Union of India through the General Managers, Central Railway and Western Railway from the judgment and decree dated December 13, 1971 by the Second Additional District Judge, Gwalior exercising the powers of a Small Court whereby the plaintiff non-petitioner's suit was decreed for Rs. 163.33 P. 2. The plaintiff's case is that nine bundles of tobacco were booked from Pedla Railway Station on 20-3-1969 for delivery to the plaintiff at Gwalior Railway Station. But all the 9 bundles of tobacco were found damaged when they were unloaded at Gwalior Railway Station. The plaintiff's allegation is that the tobacco was discoloured and had become wot on account of rains and moisture with the result that it became unfit for human consumption. It was pleaded that tobacco had been damaged on account of negligence and misconduct of the defendant Railway and its employees. Consequently, after serving notice under Section 80, C.P.C. and Section...
Firm Dharamchand Ramesh Chand Vs. Babulal Chunnilal Moghiya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-1977
Reported in: AIR1977MP186; 1977MPLJ185
ORDERC.M. Lodha, J.1. The only point involved in this revision by the plaintiff from an order by the Civil Judge, Class I, Guna is whether the non-petitioner being a member of Moghya community belongs to Scheduled tribe in terms of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order. 1950 issued by the President of India in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause 1 of Article 342 of the Constitution.2. The lower Court has held that- since in several districts of Madhya Pradesh Moghya or Mogia has been notified as a Scheduled Tribe, it will be deemed, for the purposes of the application of the Madhya Pradesh Anusuchit Jan Jati Rini Sahayata Adhiniyam, 1967 that a member of Moghya community wherever residing in the State is a member of the Scheduled Tribe.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, urges that the non-petitioner no doubt a Moghya, is a resident in the district of Guna in respect of which only the following tribes namely :--(1) Gond. (2) Korku. (3) Seharia. have been decl...
U.P. Madhya Pradesh Transport Co. Vs. Mukesh Trading Co., Lashkar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-1977
Reported in: AIR1977MP198; 1977MPLJ261
ORDERC.M. Lodha, J. 1. This is a defendant's revision against the judgment and decree dated 10-11-1971 passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Gwalior exercising powers under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. 2. The plaintiff's case is that it entrusted 315 empty gas cylinders to the defendant for being transported from Gwalior to Jaipur, where they were to be delivered to M/s. Sanghi Oxygen Co., but the defendant delivered in all 304 cylinders only to M/s. Sanghi Oxygen Co. at Jaipur in three instalments between 16-9-1965 and 18-11-1965. It is further alleged by the plaintiff that by pursuing the matter with the defendant they were able to recover 6 cylinders more on 20-9-1966. Though it was not clarified in the plaint, but the plaintiff's witness Jagdish Narayan when he came in the witness box explained that account of 4 cylinders was adjusted but one cylinder remained with the defendant. Thus the plaintiff claimed Rs. 300/- on account of the price of the empty cylinders...
Shambudayal Sarju Prasad Tiwari Vs. Regional P.F. Commissioner and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-1977
Reported in: (1977)IILLJ455MP; 1977MPLJ196
ORDERK.K. Dube, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner calling upon him to submit returns and to deposit provide at fund according to the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Family Pension Fund Act 1952 (Act 19 of 1952) hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. On the relinquishment by M/s. Norman F. Latif, the licence to run a refreshment restaurant was given to the petitioner tot three years. Messrs. Norman F. Latif, was running a non-vegetarian restaurant on platform No. 1 of Itarsi Railway Station. The petitioner started running the restaurant from 8.1.1969. The grant in favour of the petitioner to run the restaurant was made by the railway and he had no connection with the previous licensee, namely, M/s. Norman F. Latif. The Employees' Provident Funds and Family Pension Fund Act, 1952, subject to the exceptions carved by Section 16, applied to an esta...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›