Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-16-1973
Reported in : AIR1974MP141; 1974MPLJ257
Tare, C.J.1. This opinion shall govern the disposal of this Letters Patent Appeal as also the Second Appeal No 91 of 1966 -- (Durgaprasad v. Chunnilal).2. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been referred to this Court for decision of the entire appeal by a Division Bench of this Court, by order, dated 31-3-1971, as also for decision of the question whether a Bhumiswami under the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, is a tenure holder within the meaning of Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act. 1956. That question is also involved in Second Appeal No. 91 of 1966 (Madh Pra). Therefore, by this opinion, we propose to decide that question and later on, we propose to decide the Letters Patent Appeal on merits. On expression of the opinion on the question referred Second Appeal No. 91 of 1966, will have to so back to the Single Bench for decision on merits in accordance with the opinion of this Full Bench. Along with these two cases. Second Appeal No. 447 of 1966 (Madh Pra) -- (Smt. Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-18-1973
Reported in : AIR1974MP101; 1974MPLJ95
Tare. C.J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by an excise contractor Challenging the order, dated 22-12-1970 (Petitioner's Annexure P/1), passed by the Additional Tahsildar, Excise, Gwalior, and Recovery Officer, issuing notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why an amount of Rs. 4,905/- should not be recovered from him as arrears of land revenue towards the loss suffered by the Government in re-auctioning the licence for a liquor shop.2. The case had come up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court, presided over by one of us (namely, Raina, J. and Dwivedi, J.), which by order, dated 22-3-1972 referred the entire case for decision by a Full Bench, as Interpretation of Article 299 of the Constitution of India was involved, on which different opinions have been expressed in some cases. We, therefore, propose to dispose of the entire case as no particular question has been referred to us by the Division Bench for our opinion.3. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-27-1973
Reported in : [1975]98ITR474(MP); 1973MPLJ806
Raina, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act'). 2. The following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for decision: ' Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that in respect of the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63, the quantum of penalty would have to be regulated with reference to the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) before its amendment on April 1, 1968, and as the minimum penalty under Section 271(1)(c) fell below Rs. 1,000 only the Income-tax Officer has jurisdiction to proceed with the penalty proceedings ' 3. The material facts leading to this reference as stated by the Tribunal are as follows : The assessee, Ramchand Kundanlal Saraf of Bina, is the karta of a Hindu undivided family and the dispute relates to the period 1961-62 and 1962-63. In the original returns submitted by the assessee, he had shown incom...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-13-1973
Reported in : AIR1974MP24; 1974MPLJ145
Oza, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the plaintiff-appellants against the judgment passed by the Addl. District Judge, Vidisha, in Original Suit No. 2-A of 1968 wherein the plaintiff-appellants' suit was dismissed. The plaintiff-appellants filed the present suit for specific performance of contract for sale in respect of immovable property. The contract initially was executed by Prembai (since deceased) sister of respondent No. 1 and this contract was in favour of appellant No. 1 minor through next friend hislather appellant No. 2. The properties in-cluded agricultural land and a house for Rs. 11,000/-, out of which Rs. 2,000/- were paid in advance and Rs. 9,000/- were to be paid at the time of the sale. This contract was executed in writing and was registered on 25th October 1966. After the suit was filed the respondent defendants contested the suit on the ground that there was no privity of contract between him and the minor, but this plea raised by the defendant-respondent was in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-13-1973
Reported in : 1974CriLJ57; 1973MPLJ692
G.P. Singh, J.1. The judgment in this appeal shall also dispose of Criminal Appeals Nos. 211 and 215 of 1973 as also Criminal References Nos. 5, 6 and 7 of 1973.2. On 6th July 1972 there was an armed robbery in the Gun Carriage Factory Post Office, Jabalpur, at about 5-30 p. m. in which three postal employees, namely, Sitaram Chouksey, V. N. Choudhary and Durga Prasad Mishra, lost their lives. The appellants in these appeals were tried by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, in Sessions Trial No. 100 of 1972 for offences under Sections 302, 449 and 394 read with Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. By the judgment delivered on 20th February 1973, Pravin Kumar Gupta (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 171 of 1973) has been convicted under Section 302 for committing murder of V. N. Choudhary and under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code for committing murder of Sitaram Chouksey and Durga Prasad Mishra. For these offences he has been sentenced to death. He has als...
Tag this Judgment!