Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1961MP223
ORDERTare, J. 6. This appeal is by the judgment-debtor against the order, dated 7-11-1959, passed by Shri S.N. Chaturvedi, Additional District Judge, Panna, in Execution Case No. 2 of 1959, arising out of the execution proceedings, relating to Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 85 of 1955, and Civil Revision No. 59 of 1955, decided by the Court of Additional Judicial Commissioner of the former State of Vindhya Pradesh on 23-12-1955.7. This appeal, involves a question of limitation only. The question arises under the following circumstances :The Judicial Commissioner Vindhya Pradesh, by order, dated 23-12-1955, in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 85 o 1955 and Civil Revision No. 59 of 1955, allowed the same with costs and set aside the decree and order of the court below. Although the judgment and the order were delivered on 23-12-1955, no decree was drawn up till 26-10-1956. On that date, a decree was drawn up and signed in the appeal. As no decree was required to be drawn up in the revision...
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 : AIR1962MP146
Naik, J. 1. My opinion in this case shall also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 144, 145 and 154 of 1960.2. All these petitions raise a common question of law, were heard together and can be disposed of by a common order. They are all directed against the orders of the Collector, Damoh, requisitioning the godowns of the petitioners for what he alleged was 'a public Purpose', viz., for storage of Government foodgrains. The orders have been passed in exercise of the powers conferred on all the Collectors under Section 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation (Requisition) Act (No. LXIII of 1948) (hereinafter called the Act), read with Section 14 thereof by the State Government vide Home (General) Department Notification No. 2866/II-A (3), dated the 3rd July, 1959. The petitions seek to get the said orders quashed by a writ of certiorari or by any other appropriate writ, order or direction, inter alia, on the following grounds, which are being considered first as they are ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1962MP212; 1962MPLJ248
Shrivastava, J. 1. The suit out of which this first appeal arises was filed by the respondent Smt. Aman Kumari for possession of homefarm lands lying in several villages and for possession of movables. The respondent has also filed an appeal (First Appeal No. 120 of 1958) against the judgment in that case. This judgment governs the disposal of both the appeals.2. In the erstwhile State of Korea which merged within Madhya Pradesh in 1948, there was a zemindari called 'Patna Zemindari'. It was held by one Jagdish Prasad Singh till his death in 1942. The respondent Smt. Aman Kumari is the widow of the said Jagdish Prasad Singh. He bad also left behind a son Gopal Saran Singh who died in 1948. The appellant Smt. Mira Devi claims to be his widow, having married him on 4-7-1941 under the Special Marriage Act, 1872 (III of 1872)--hereinafter referred to as the Act of .1872. Appellants Vijay Prasad Singh and Lalit Prasad, Singh are sons of Smt. Mira Devi from the deceased Gopal Saran Singh. Af...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1962MP117
Pandey, J.1. On a reference made by Tare, J., the question referred to the Full Bench is :'Whether the suit of a plaintiff money lender is liable to be dismissed if he does not hold a registration certificate relating to the period when the money lending transactions were entered into or whether it is sufficient if the plaintiff-money lender produces during the pendency of the suit a registration certificate relating to a period subsequent tothe money-lending transactions.'2. The facts of the case are simple and may be stated in a few words. On the foot of a promissory note dated 19 March 1956, the applicant, who is a moneylender, advanced to the non-applicants a ban of:Rs. 850. When the applicant subsequently filed a suit to recover the amount with interest from the non-applicants they resisted it. The Small Cause Court dismissed the suit on two grounds. The applicant did not produce her certificate of registration required to be taken under Section 11-B of the Central Provinces and B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1962MP245
Pandey, J. 1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against two notices dated 5th December 1958, one for the period 7th November 1953 to 26th October 1954 (Annexure III) and another for the period 27th October 1954 to 5th September 1955 (Annexure IV), by which the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jabalpur (respondent 3), who had entertained the petitioner's appeals against the assessment of sales tax on their turnover for the two periods proposed to tax the turnover of certain transactions made during those periods, which were said to be liable to tax under Section 4(6) of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter, called the Act) but were not taxed by the assessing authority.2. The facts giving rise to this petition may be briefly stated. The petitioners carry on the business of manufacturing and selling bidis on a large scale. They have their head office at Jabalpur where they are registered as a dealer for purposes of the Ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1963]47ITR895(MP)
PANDEY J. - This petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitutions is directed against an order dated May 27, 1961, by which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Indore, rectified under section 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the Act), an order of his predecessor-in-office dated May 29, 1957. By the impugned order, the losses allowed to be carried forward and set off were restricted to those incurred in the taxable territories. In this manner, the losses for the assessments year 1948-49 carried forward and set off were reduced from Rs. 78,123 to Rs. 1,075 and those for the assessment year 1949-50 were similarly reduced from Rs. 3,762 to Rs. 123.In the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50, the petitioner, who was assessed as a non-resident, incurred losses for the most part in the respectively in the life insurance business carried on by it. From December 1, 1949, the petitioner started the business of insurance against fire also. In the proceedings for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963MP51; 1962MPLJ1102
A.H. Khan, J. 1. This is plaintiff's first appeal from the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Shivpuri, in case No. 4 of 1952, Original Civil, dismissing the plaintiff's claim for the recovery of Rs. 13527-11-6.2. The plaintiffs are the owners of a firm known as Firm Seth Tiparchand Hiralal, while the defendants are owners of another Firm, known as Firm Thakurdas Gopilal.3. The plaintiff's case is that the owners of the defendant-firm on 11-3-34, after going through the accounts of the plaintiff-firm admitted a sum. of Rs. 12491/- due to the plaintiffs and in acknowledgment of the debt signed an entry in the plaintiff's Bahi-Khata. Out of this, a sum of Rs. 3697-10-9 has been realised, and, the present suit is for the recovery of the balance (Rs. 8793-5-3) and interest thereon at 9 per cent per annum.4. The defendants admitted signing the Bahi-Khata. But the main ground on which they resisted the suit was that subsequent to the signing of the Bahi-Khata, an agreement...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964MP81; 1965MPLJ96
Krishnan, J. 1. This is an application by the proprietors of an industrial unit consisting of number of factories in an enclosed area covering more than ten acres and assessed to a building tax (bhavan kar) at the minimum rate of 4 annas per hundred square feet of ground area, by the local authority, which is the Gram Panchayat Susari in Tehsil Kukshi of District Dhar. This is the non-applicant No. 1and for the reasons, that will presently appear, the State of Madhya Pradesh has been made opposite party No. 2. Because the area is several hundred thousand square feet, the bhavan kar assessed is Rs. 1066/- per acre.The prayer is that this assessment should be declared illegal, because for one thing, the law under which it is being levied is bad for excessive delegation to the Government, and further the legal position is worsened by a second delegation on the part of the Government to the Director of Panchayats, and a further delegation by him at least of part of the power to the local a...
Tag this Judgment!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!