Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-05-1957
Reported in : AIR1957MP224; 1957CriLJ1410
ORDERNevaskar, J.1. The accused in this case is a cyclist peon in the engineering section of the Indore Municipality.2. The case put up against him by the Anti-Corruption Department was that he, on 28th August 1952 obtained Rs. 100/- by false representation from one Ganpat Mali, representing himself to be a Municipal Inspector. He was, therefore, put up for trial before the Special Judge, Indore under Sections 161 and 420, I. P. C. The learned Special Judge decided after full trial that the accused did not fall within the category of a public servant within the meaning of the term as used in Indian Penal Code and the Indore Municipal Act.3. He, therefore, held that the accused could not be tried and convicted for an offence under Section 161, I. P. C. He further held that inasmuch as no offence under Section 161, I. P. C. could be made out against the accused, he could not try the accused under Section 420, I. P. C., simpliciter. He, therefore, directed the complaint to be filed before...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-28-1957
Reported in : AIR1958MP16; [1957]8STC407(MP)
ORDER1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ against the Sales Tax Department. The petitioner Messrs. Govindram Ramprasad is a registered partnership firm carrying on the business of selling petroleum products and kerosene at Indore. In the year 1952-53, the petitioner purchased from the Bombay office of the Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Company of India, Ltd., 5306 packed and sealed tins of kerosene.These tins were admittedly sold by the petitioner to its customers in the original packing. At first the Sales Tax Department did not include in the turnover of the petitioner the price realised from the sale of the tins because kerosene was not a taxable commodity within the meaning of the Act. Later, however, in 1956 a notice was served on the petitioner under Section 10 of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act informing it that a certain portion of its turnover for the year 1952-53 had escaped assessment and that the assessment was to be rev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-28-1957
Reported in : AIR1957MP145
Nevaskar, J. 1. This is an appeal filed on behalf of the State of Madhya Bharat against the order of acquittal passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Khilchipur.2. Accused Gokulchand s/o Bhawarlal resident of Mouja Miana was prosecuted for an offence under section 3 read with Section 7 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1948 for transporting two cart-loads of Jwar from Miana from Sarangpur Tehsil to Jirapur in Khil-chipur Tehsil on 19-5-1954 and thereby contravening Notification No. 132/29/170 (50) dated 5-1-1951 published in the Madhya Bharat Government Gazette dated 13-1-1951, issued by the Government of Madhya Bharat in exercise of its powers delegated to it under Section 4 of the Act.3. The learned Magistrate found that the accused had brought two cart-loads of Jwar from his village Miana, to Jirapur. He however acquitted the accused mainly on two grounds. Firstly, he held that the written charge-sheet submitted by the Police for taking cognisance of the offence did...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-09-1957
Reported in : AIR1957MP171
1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the order of Kotval J., in Miscellaneous Petition No. 466 of 1955.2. The appellant used to carry on business in the State of Nandgaon and did so during the years 1946-47, 1947-48 and 1948-49. At that time, the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, were applicable to the Nandgaon State on account of the extension of that Act to the State in the year 1942. The appellant was assessed to income-tax for the above years under the said act by three separate orders of the Income-tax Officer, dated respectively 29-12-1947, 9-1-1948 and 29-3-1949, and the tax was duly realised by the State authorities.The State merged with Madhya Pradesh with effect from ]st August 1949 by the State Merger (Governors' Provinces) Order, 1849, end by the Taxation Laws (Extension to Merged States and Amendment) Act 1949 (hereinafter referred to in the judgment as the Taxation Laws Act) the Indian Income-tax Act was extended to the State of Nandgaon with effect fro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-15-1957
Reported in : AIR1957MP165
Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This is petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking ii writ of prohibition against the District Judge, Bhind who is hearing an election petition. The facts of the case go far back and will have to be stated at some length.2. In the year 1955 in, the town of Gohad a municipal election was held. The petitioner Biharilal was a candidate in Ward No. 3, and the first three respondents were his rivals. The petitioner secured the largest number of votes and was declared elected. The first respondent filed an election petition under Section 10 of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act, 1954 (Act No. 1 of 1954) read with Rule 131 of the Rules framed thereunder. Before the District Judge an objection was taken to his jurisdiction to entertain the election petition, which the District Judge overruled.Against the order of the District Judge and to seek a writ of prohibition a petition was filed in the High Court of Madhya Bharat, and the High Court acting on its own ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : May-31-1957
Reported in : AIR1958MP33; 1958CriLJ181
Samvatsar, J.1. This revision application is filed by accused Haji Usman who has been convicted of anoffence under Section 46 (a) of the Ayat Niryat Kar Vidhan, Samvat 2006 read with Madhya Bharat Government Notification No. 7 dated 14th August, 1948 and sentenced to suffer imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. The facts giving rise to this petition are briefly stated as follows :2. On 2-11-1950 the petitioner despatched from his shop at Dewas 309 tins of groundnut seed oil for being exported to the then Bhopal State. The truck in which these tins were being carried was checked a little aheadof Daulatpur Custom Post in the territory of Madhya Bharat and as export of this oil from Madhya Bharat was then prohibited, the tins were seized and the accused-petitioner was prosecuted before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate First Class, Sonkatch.3. The accused denied having committed any offence but the learned Magistrate found Mm guilty and sentenced him to suffer ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-02-1957
Reported in : AIR1958MP333
1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal by appellant No. 1, Nirmalchand, and is directed against the order of Mudholkar, J. in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 89 of 1949. His grand-mother Mst. Rajrani has formally joined as appellant No. 2. The Miscellaneous Appeal was filed against the final decree of satisfaction passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 3-A of 1934.2. The suit, out of which this appeal arises, was filed on 10-2-1934 for recovery of Rs. 2,79,596/- and odd due on a simple mortgage bond, dated 13-8-1921. The sum advanced was Rs. 2,00,000/- which carried interest at 11 annas per cent, per mensem, with half yearly rests, the interest to be added to the principal on default and liable itself to carry interest at the same rate. The respondents paid Rs. 1,37,121/- towards the debt before the institution of the suit.As there was some dispute about calculation of interest, a round sum of Rs. 2,61,000/-, which roughly included interest at the agreed rate, wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-02-1957
Reported in : AIR1958MP417
B.K. Chaturvedi, J.1. This is plaintiffs second appeal against a decision of the 2nd Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, holding that the contract in the suit is champertous and cannot be specifically enforced; but at the same time it granted a decree for Rs. 4,000/- in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has come in second appeal and desires specific performance of the contract and prays for the restoration of the trial Court's decree.2. The facts of the case are: Lala Ram Dube (respondent No.3) is the father, respondent No. 1 Smt. Chhuttanbai is his daughter and respondent No. 2 Moolchand is his son. There were disputes between father and son about the property which according to the former was self-acquired, and according to the latter was ancestral. The wife of Moolchand (respondent No. 2) also filed a suit against her father-in-law for the return of her ornaments.The son had no money to file a suit for partition; so he approached the plaintiff for some money. The plaintiff agr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-10-1957
Reported in : AIR1960MP372
Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal of the State of Madhya Pradesh is directed against the judgment and decree of the Court of Civil Judge, Class I, Raipur, in civil suit No. 2-A of 1950.2. By a deed of conveyance, dated 6th February 1868, Durga Prasad, grandfather of the plaintiff-respondent, acquired from the Secretary of State for India 2578 acres of waste land for a consideration of Rs. 3,600. The area that was acquired was situate at Mohrengah and Pultrakondoo and in the subsequent settlement case to be called mousa Khaolidabri. The conveyance provided that the land shall be held'for ever free from all present or future demand on account of Government Land Revenue, but subject to all general taxes or local rates, nowor hereafter to be imposed by law in respect thereof, and to all claims of the Government of India in respect of such land other than claims of Government Land Revenue.'3. After the enactment of the Central Provinces and Berar Revocation of Land Revenue Exemptions Act, 1948,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-12-1957
Reported in : AIR1958MP21
Samvatsar, J.1. This is defendants' first appeal and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs-respondents in the Court of the Civil Judge, First Class, Guna, to recover from them a sum of Rs. 8,000/-, The plaintiff's case as laid out in the plaint is that the defendants who are members of a joint Hindu family and carry on business in the name of Mansukhdas Khemchand, had from time to time borrowed various sums of money from the plaintiffs; that an account of these dealings, was made on 28-5-1939 when a sum of Rs. 8,000/- was found due to the plaintiffs; that the defendant No. 1, who was then the manager of the business and Karta of the joint family admitted the correctness of the balance and affixed his signature to the debit entry in plaintiffs' Bahi.It is then alleged in the plaint that on 25-4-1942 the defendant No. 3 borrowed a further sum of Rs. 125/- and signed the debit entry in the plaintiff's Bahi acknowledging receipt of this loan that on 27-5-1945 defendant No. 3 appro...
Tag this Judgment!