Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1972MP66; 1971MPLJ873
Dwivedi, J. 1. This is an appeal by the unsuccessful respondent No. 4 (State of Uttar Pradesh through Officer-in-charge of the case. Assistant General Manager, U. P. Government Roadways, Agra) against the award of Rs. 7,500/-(Rs. 7,000/- for general damages and Rs. 500/- for expenses of treatment) of the Claims Tribunal, Gwalior. 2. The petitioner Dayali was working as a permanent employee of the folding department of J. C. Mills, Ltd., Birlanagar, Gwalior, drawing pay of Rs. 150/- per month. He owned agricultural field near Moti Jhil on the Agra-Bombay Road. The respondent No. 1 Babulal was the driver of the bus No. U. P. A. 8105 belonging to the respondent No. 4. On the relevant date, 11-2-1967. at 4 p. m., the petitioner Davali was going to his field on a cycle. The respondent No. 1 was driving the aforesaid bus from Gwalior towards Agra on the Agra-Bombay road which dashed against the petitioner. The petitioner remained in the J. A. Hospital as an indoor patient from 11-2-1967 to 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1973]30STC291(MP)
ORDERP.K. Tare, J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of the following cases also:(1) M. P. No. 440/68-Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel & Co. and Anr. v. The State of M.P. and Ors.(2) M. P. No. 441/68- Vrajlal Manilal & Co. and Anr. v. The State of M.P. and Ors.(3) M. P. No. 485/68- Kalekhan Mohd. Hanif and Another v. The State of M.P. and Ors. (4) M. P. No. 486/68- Jashwantlal Prahladbhai & Co. and Anr. v. The State of M.P. and Ors.(5) M. P. No. 487/68- Purshottam Jorabhai & Co. and Anr. v. The State of M.P. and Ors..(6) M. P. No. 530/68- Banwarilal Harmukh Rai and Another v. The State of M.P. and Ors..(7) M. P. No. 551/68- Dayalal Meghji & Co. and Anr. v. The State of M.P. and Ors.(8) M. P. No. 552/68- Tulsibhai Gordhanbhai Patel and Anr. v. The State of M.P. and Ors.(9) M. P. No. 553/68- Dayabhai Khushalbhai Patel and Anr. v. The State of M.P. and Ors.(10) M. P. No. 554/68- M. Ishaq M. Gulam and Another v. The State of M.P. and Ors.(11) M. P. No. 555/68- Chhotalal Keshoram and Another...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1973MP26
Tare, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by a Contractor, who took the Contract of purchase of Tendu leaves from the Government for the year 1970 under the M. P. Tendu Patta (Vvapar Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1964, and the M. P. Tendu Patta, Nivamavali, 1965 and 1966, and by this petition, he seeks a renewal of the contract for the Years 1971 and 1972 on the same terms.2. A State monopoly was created by enactment of the M. P. Tendu Patta (Vvapar Viniyaman) Adhiniym, 1964, which received the assent of the President on 23-11-1964 and which came into force from 28-11-1964. It will be necessary o consider some relevant provisions of the Act later on. The appellant Firm had purchased the right of collection of Tendu leaves for the year 1970 which provided for a renewal clause for a further period of two years on certain terms. It may be relevant to reproduce Condition No. 25 of the Tender Notice which is as follows:--'25. (1) Unless earlier determined under th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
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
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
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
Reported in : AIR1975MP163
Tare, C.J. 1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Criminal Revision No. 159 of 1971 (Rev. Stainislaus v. The State of M. P.). 2. On a report made by the Circle Inspector, Balodabazar, dated 9-3-1970, and on a complaint made by him on 23-5-1970, the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Balodabazar, sanctioned prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offences under Sections 3, 4, 5 (2) and Section 6 of the Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam, 1968 (No. 27 of 1968), by Order, dated 23-10-1970, in exercise of the powers delegated to him by Section 7 of the said Act. Accordingly, an offence was registered and Criminal Case No. 1195 of 1970 was initiated in the Court of the Magistrate, 1st Class, Balodabazar. 3. The petitioner raised a preliminary objection as to the tenability of the prosecution contending that the Act was ultra vires the powers of the State legislature, as it did not fall within the scope of Entry No. I to List II and Entry No. 1 to List III of the Seventh Sched...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1975MP1; 1974MPLJ699
Raina, J.1. This order will govern Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 391, 392, 394, 395, 399, 400, 401, 403, 404, 405, 407, 409, 413, 415, 416, 417, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 427 and 430 of 1970.2. The petitioners in these cases are Excise Contractors and hold licences for sale of foreign liquor in Form F. L. 1 at various places in the State. A licence in Form F. L. 1 is for retail sale of foreign liquors not to be drunk on the premises. Before 1964, licences for sale of foreign liquor were granted by the Excise authorities on applications. In 1964-65, the State Government for the first time introduced the system of public auctions for the grant of such licences. This action of the Government was challenged by writ petitions in the High Court; but they were subsequently withdrawn after the Madhya Pradesh Excise (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1964 (Act No. 19 of 1964)was passed. Thereafter, auctions were held in the year 1965-66. In the year 1966-67, no auction was held and the old licences ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1977MP18
ORDERShiv Dayal, J. 1. The respondent's suit was for the recovery of Rs. 579.59 on account of short delivery and damages against the Union of India, represented by the South Eastern Railway, the Central Railway and the Western Railway. The suit consignment was booked from Panelimoti to Raigarh vide railway receipt Ex. D-3 and forwarding note Ex. D-5. Out of 660 tins of groundnut oil, 17 tins were damaged, 9 tins were completely crushed and the contents of 8 tins weighed only 80 kgs. It has been found by the trial Court that there was short delivery of 13 tins and 4 kgs. of oil, the value of which was Rs. 554.59 P. It passed a decree for the entire amount claimed.2. It was averred in paragraph 5 of the plaint that the consignment wasbooked at railway risk rate. This was denied in paragraph 5 of the written statement and it was contended that the consignment was booked at the owner's risk rate.3. It was argued for the petitioner that since the railway receipt clearly shows that it was bo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1975CriLJ713
P.K. Tare, C.J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of both the cases mentioned above. These are references under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1898, made bv the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, and the Fifth Additional Sessions Judge. Jabalpur. respectively recommendinp that the committal orders, dated 30-3-1973 and 21-4-1973, passed bv the Juvenile Court. Jabalpur, in Criminal Case No. 120 of 1972 and Criminal Case No. 54 of 1973, respectively, committing the respective accused to stand his trial in the Sessions Court for an alleged offence under Section 376, I. P. C, be quashed on the ground that in view of the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Bal Adhiniyam. 1970. a Juvenile Court alone has the jurisdiction to hold an inquiry and consequently, the Sessions Court has no jurisdiction to proceed with the trial of the respective accused.2. In the present case, the two accused, Ramesh and Shivram alias Munna, who are boys aged about 14 and 11 vears respecti...
Tag this Judgment!