Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964MP30; 1964CriLJ198
Krishnan, J.1. All the three proceedings arise out of the Judgment of 30-6-1962 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, in the trials numbered 24 to 28 of 1962, on the consolidation of five separate commitments by the First Class Magistrate Khach rod, relating to a serious incident, on the 2oth September, 1961, at village called Bhilsuda, in the police station area of Nagda. The death reference has been made for the confirmation of the sentence of death under Section 302 read with 149 Indian Penal Code on six persons, namely, Kalusingh, Nir-bhayasingh, Ambaram, Jujharsingh, Ratansingh son of Hindusingh, and Chhatarsingh. They, as well as ten others, namely, Anarsingh son of Ramsingh, Bagdiram son of Bherusingh, Bherusingh son of Rupaji, Ramsingh son of Fakkaji, Pyarji son of Ghasi, Onkarsingh son of Bherusingh, Ratansingh son of Amarsingh, Hindusingh son of Narsingh, Navalsingh son of Sewaji and Dhanna son of Bheru-singh have appealed in two batches. Those who have not been s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1980MP95
J.S. Verma, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's suit has been decreed to the extent of Rupees 33,955.50 Paise, with interest, only against the defendants Nos. 3 to 6 and it has been dismissed in its entirety against defendants 1, 2, 7 and 8. The plaintiff in this appeal prays for passing the decree against defendants 1 and 2 (respondents 1 and 2) also but no such prayer has been made against defendants 7 and 8 who have not even been impleaded as parties. Thus the only question in this appeal is whether the suit can be decreed also against defendants Nos. 1 and 2.2. The plaintiff Radheshyam Agarwal is a businessman carrying on business in oil and other commodities at Jabalpur, Defendants 1 and 2 are the Central Railway and Southern Railway administrations. The defendant No. 3 is a partnership firm carrying on business in coconut oil at Alwaye in the State of Kerala, Defendants 4 to 6 are the partners of this firm and they are brothers. Defendants 7 and 8 are two ban...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1966MP67
Shiv Dayal, J. 1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent from the judgment and decree of Pandey J., affirming those of the executing Court, raises the question whether on sale of land in execution of a decree for realisation of money, the auction-purchaser ipso facto acquires title to the growing crops. The learned Single Judge answered it in the affirmative. This is judgment-debtor's appeal.2. Smt. Shyamabai had a decree against the appellant Chhatradharilal for recovery of money. In execution of that decree, extensive lands belonging to the judgment-debtor were attached and sold. The decree-holder herself purchased the property for Rs. 30,000/- in Court sale. A sale certificate declaring her to be the purchaser of Khudkasht and sir lands, area 300.86 acres in village Thelka, was issued. In the sale certificate, khasra numbers together with area of every one of them were specified. It was on an application filed by decree-holder's agent, asserting that the decree-holder was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1991MP180; 1991(0)MPLJ98
K.L. Issrani, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 17-2-1990 passed by the Fifth Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur, in Civil Suit No. 2-A of 1990 refusing to grant temporary injunction against the recovery of the telephone bills of the appellant.2. In this case, the respondents haveraised a preliminary objection that the application of the appellant for appointment of an arbitrator is not maintainable because the dispute is not covered under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. For deciding the preliminary objection, it is necessary to mention some facts here. The appellant was nominated as a member of the M. P. Telecom Advisory Committee on 28-6-1985. His term was extended up to 30-6-1989. In his capacity as a member of the M.P.T.A.C., a free telephone No. 28888 was provided to him and was installed at his residence. No rent was to be charged for the said telephone and 1200 local calls bimonthly were allowed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1980MP188; 1980MPLJ644
ORDERJ.S. Verma, J.1. The petitioner Purshottamlal Kaushik and the respondent Vidya Charan Shukla were two of the contesting candidates in the last Lok Sabha general elections held in January, 1980 from No. 18, Mahasamund Parliamentary Constituency. The result of the election was declared on 7-1-1980 and the respondent Vidya Charan Shukla was declared elected to the Lok Sabha from that constituency. This election result was notified in the official gazette on 10-1-1980. The present petition has been filed on 18-2-1980, for declaring the respondent's election to be void on two grounds, namely, under Section 100(1)(a) and Section 100(1)(d)(i) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Facts on which both the grounds are based are the same. All the relevant facts are admitted between the parties and the only question is whether on the admitted facts both or any of the grounds on which the petition is based have been made out. These facts are stated hereafter.2. The respondent Vidya Ch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1993MP184
T.N. Singh, J. 1. This Order shall dispose of two inter linked matters, heard analogously. Both matters arise out of a common order passed on 16-10-1990 in Civil Suit No. 9A of 1990, by learned Fourth Additional District Judge, Gwalior. By that order, he disposed of simultaneously the application of plaintiff Jyotiraditya Scindia for temporary injunction and the application of the appellant/revisionist, Shrimant Vijaya Raje Scindia, impleaded in the suit as defendant No. 1, for rejection of the plaint. He held that the plaintiff's suit and his application for temporary injunction could not be thrown out at the threshold and that no case was made out to do so under Order VII, Rules 5, 7 and II read with Section 151, C.P.C. In deciding the application of the plaintiff for temporary injunction, he found a prima facie case made out and held that balance of convenience was in favour of the plaintiff who would suffer irreparable injury if defendant No. 1 was not restrained from alienating, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1967MP221
Naik, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant, a minor, filed, a suit, through his next friend Durga Vinod Singh, for a declaration that the sale-deed, dated 28-8-1959, executed by his eldest brother, Gopal Singh (respondent No. 1) as the karta of the joint Family, consisting of himself and his brothers, viz., Raj Bahadur Singh and the minor plaintiff Baldeo Singh, was void, as it was not executed for legal necessity or for the benefit of the estate. It was also averred in the plaint that the suit property in respect of which the declaration was sought was in possession of tenants, who had not yet attorned to the vendees; nor had the defendants-vendees been able to obtain possession of the suit property from the tenants in any other way. It was also pleaded, in the alternative, that as the plaintiff was a minor and as the permission of the Court had not been obtained in accordance with the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, the sale-deed in question was void in any case to the extent of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1990]183ITR445(MP)
N.D. Ojha, C.J.1. In this case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of Section 271(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the cancellation of penalty by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner under Section 271(1)(a) of the Act ?'2. Shri Lahoti appeared for the Commissioner of Income-tax, while Shri J.P. Gupta appeared for the assessee. During the course of arguments in this case, learned counsel for the parties made a statement today that another Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 97 of 1983 in which a similar question was involved and in which also the assessee was represented by Shri J.P. Gupta and Shri Lahoti appeared for the Commissioner of Income-tax, be also taken up and decided along with the Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 43 of 1983. In view of the joint request made by learned counsel for both part...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1961MP314
K.L. Pandey, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff 1 is directed against the affirming decree of the lower appeal Court by which his claim for recovery of a loan, together with interest, amounting in all to Rs. 1,500/- from the defendants 1 and 2 was dismissed on the ground that appeal was not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties.2. There was an unregistered partnership of Shrikishan (plaintiff 1), Gopikishan (father of plaintiffs 2 and 3) and Bawalram called Bawalram Moolchand which, it was claimed, advanced, on 19th September, 1952, a loan of Rs. 1,200/- to the defendants 1 and 2. On 17th September 1955, Shrikishan alone filed the suit in his own name impleading Bawalram and the heirs of Gopikishan (who was already dead) as defendants because they did not agree to join as co-plaintiffs. However, during the pendency of the suit, the heirs of Gopikishan were, at their own request, transposed as plaintiffs 2 and 3.3. Upon contest, the Court of first instance dismissed the claim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990CriLJ1990
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. This and other connected petitions for bail, raise and involve a common question of law as regards the scope and amplitude of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psycotropic Substances Act 1985 (as amended by Amendment Act No. 2 of 1989) for short hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. Learned counsels on both sides, who include Sarvashri H. Section Oberai, Joshi, and Tiwari for the applicants seeking bail and Shri Khan for the Department of Narcotics and Shri Desai, for the State have forcefully presented their view points. Both agree and rightly so, at this stage, that the factual allegations as made, cannot be disputed; yet Shri Oberai maintained that such procedural lapses on the part of the investigating agency, which would ultimately be materially affecting the prosecution case, would be one such circumstance, which should be taken into consideration by the Court, while reaching the satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that accused is...
Tag this Judgment!