Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP120
K.L. Pandey, J. 1. The plaintiff initiated an action claiming Rupees 10,100/- as compensation for not being allowed to pluck and remove myrobalan from the forests of certain villages in the Baihar tahsil of Balaghat district. The lower Court accepted the claim in part and passed a decrete for Rs. 1,222/-. The plaintiff has appealed against that part of the decree by which his claim was dismissed. The defendant has filed a cross-objectionagainst the claim decreed by the lower Court. This judgment will govern the appeal as well as the cross-objection. 2. It is no longer disputed that, by three unregistered documents, the plaintiff purported to acquire from the proprietors of certain villages for consideration the right to rear and pluck for some years myrobalan in their forests and to take away the myrobalan so obtainable. The details of those transactions are as given below:-- Names of villagesName of proprietor Date of transaction.Years for which rights were created. I. Pondi Bharri S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1968MP163; [1968]21STC202(MP)
Dixit, C.J.1. This order will also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Civil Cases Nos. 97 to 103, all of 1967.2. These eight Miscellaneous Civil Cases are all references under Section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, (hereinafter called the Act), and arise out of proceedings initiated against the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, Jabal-pur, for assessment to sales tax and purchase tax for the periods from 1957-58 to 1964-65. The common questions in these references, which have been referred to this Court for decision by the Sales Tax Tribunal (Board of Revenue), are :--'1 On the facts and circumstances of the case whether or not the Madhya Pra-desh Electricity Board is a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the C. P. & Berar Sales Tax Act, and Section 2(d) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, in respect of its activity of generation, distribution, sale and supply of electrical energy? 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964MP242; [1964]15STC254(MP)
Dixit, C.J.1. This order will also govern the disposal of Misc. Petitions Nos. 278, 279 and 281, all of 1963.2. These are four petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of writs of certiorari for quashing the notices issued by the Sales Tax Officer Jabalpur, under Section 29 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), to each of the petitioner. The petitioners also pray that appropriate directions be issued to the opponents to restrain them from making any assessment to sales tax against them in respect of transactions of 'hire-purchase' entered into by them.3. The petitioner's case, broadly stated, is that they carry on the business of financing purchase of motor vehicles on 'hire-purchase' system from their offices located at Allahabad, in Uttar Pradesh; that they have no place of business in the State of Madhya Pradesh and never carried on in the past, nor do they carry on now, within the State of Madhya Pradesh any bus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1958MP289
ORDER1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari and of mandamus and such other directions, orders or writs as may be deemed just, and appropriate in the case by Rajaram Richharia, who was officiating District Excise Officer, at present working as temporary Sales Tax Officer at Jabalpur.2. The petitioner was Excise Inspector at Raipur in the service of the State of Madhya Pradesh. The Excise Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh, Nagpur, recommended to the Joint Public Service Commission, Ranchi, the names of Shri N.L. Das and two other Excise Inspectors for promotion in supersession of the petitioner's claims. Those recommended officers were also asked to officiate as District Excise Officers, Shri N.L. Das was posted in the Nimar District as officiating District Excise Officer with effect from 16-7-1946 in anticipation of the concurrence of the Public Service Commission.At the end of 1946, the Public Service Commission disapproved ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP353
Shrivastava, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by which the petitioner seeks a writ against the non-applicants to compel them to complete the election to the office of the President Municipal Committee, Katni, District Jabalpur. 2. The Collector Jabalpur had published a programme of election to the Municipality of Katni according to which the nomination papers had to be filed by 12-5-1958 and the polling was to take place on 13-6-1958. The petitioner filed his nomination paper for contesting the office of President on 5-5-1958. Section 18 of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Municipalities Act) provided for the election of the President directly by all the voters. It was, however, amended by the Madhya Pra-desh Municipalities (Amendment) Act, 1958 (Act No. 14 of 1958) which came into force on 5-5-1958. By this amendment the President is now to be elected by the members of the Committee. Section 7 of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT225
ORDERRajenra Menon, J.1. Petitioner, an elected President of Municipal Council, Ambah District Morena, has called in question tenability of an order dated 12-12-2002, passed by the State Government vide Annexure P/4-A, removing him from the post of President, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 41 (A) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961).2. According to the petitioner, he was elected to the Municipal Council (hereinafter referred to as the Council) in the election held on 26-12-1999, result thereof was declared on 28-12-1999, certificate, Annexure P-1 is the declaration under the relevant statutory rule declaring him to be elected as President of the Council.3. It is the case of petitioner that even though he was discharging his duties effectively and in accordance with law, but certain persons were personally annoyed with him, therefore, complaints were made to respondent No. 1 who by letter dated 17-7-2001, Annexure...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2003MP223; 2003(3)MPLJ264
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. The petitioner, elected President of Municipal Council Shivpuri has filed this petition questioning the tenability and validity of the order Annexure P-1 dated 13-9-2002 passed by the State Govt. in exercise of its powers under Section 41A of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act 1961 removing him from office.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was elected as President of the Council on 27-12-1999, he took charge of the Office on 4-1-2000 and since then had been discharging the duties when by the impugned order he has been removed.3. It is averred by the petitioner that prior to him one Smt. Krishna Gupta was President of the Municipal Council, during her tenure a resolution was passed by the Council for the purpose of laying down roads with asphalt, the Council sanctioned the bid invited tender's and contract was given for construction of asphalt, road on hotmix method. It is averred in the petition that for the said purpose a sum of Rs. 24 lacs was s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(2)MPHT193
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India shall decide the connected batch of Petitions Nos. W.P. 2059/99 (Ravi Thakur and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.), W.P. 1984/99, (Rajendra Soni v. The State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2080/99 (Ajay Shrivastava v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2082/99 (Thakur Dutt Sharma and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2084/99 (Kanchan Singh Chouhan v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2085/99 (Dilawar Khan and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2087/99 (Muinuddin v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2124/99 (Jagdish Prasad Jaiswal and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Anr.), W.P. 2131/99 (Chhotelal Choudhary v. State of M.P.), W.P. 2152/99 (Sita Prasad Tripathi v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2154/99 (Mithilesh Kumar Mishra and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.), W.P. 2159/99 (Bhagwat Prasad Mahere v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2161/99 (Pooran Pathak v. State of M.P. and Ors.), W.P. 2184/99 (Govind Lal Sahu v. State ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(5)MPHT374
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions, the assail is to the constitutional validity of Sub-section (4) of Section 1 and Section 1-A of the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (for brevity 'the 1960 Act') and the notification issued under the said provisions. The said provisions were introduced by M.P. Act No. 16 of 2000 by the Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Sambandh (Sanshodhan) Adhiniyam, 2000 with a stipulation that the said provision would come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification, appoint and was brought into force by notification dated 17-5-2006 from the date of publication of the notification. The petitioners have also challenged the notification issued in exercise of power conferred under Sub-section (4) of Section 1 of the 1960 Act by the State Government whereby it has directed that the provisions of the said Act shall not apply to the industries specified in the Schedule to the said notification with a postulate that the said exclusio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP1
A.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. This is a reference made to the Full Bench by a Division Bench of this Court in a pending Public Interest Litigation filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The relevant facts for appreciating why the reference has been made to the Full Bench are that the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 988 of 1999 as a Public Interest Litigation (for short 'PIL') challenging the grant and payment of pension to Ex-Legislators of the State of Madhya Pradesh as well as the vires of the M.P. Vidhan Sabha Sadasya Vetan Tatha Bhatta Tatha Pension Adhiniyam. A Division Bench of this Court hearing the PIL found that the issue raised in the PIL had already been settled by another Division Bench of this Court in Raghu Thakur v. State AIR 1997 MP 223 and the grant and payment of pension to Ex-Legislators had been held as intra vires the Constitution. The Division Bench further held in the order dated 9-9-1999 in W.P. No. 988 of 1999 reported in 2000 (2) M...
Tag this Judgment!