Gujarat Court September 1960 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ranchhod Mula Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-16-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ472
Raju, J.1. The appellant Ranchhod Mula, who was accused No. 1 at the Sessions trial in Sessions Case No. 87 of 1959, was convicted by the learned Extra Assistant Sessions Judge at Ahmedabad under Sections 232, 235 and 243 of the Indian Penal Code.2.The prosecution case was that on receiving, information P. S. I. Bhanushariker of Elis Bridge Police Station, Ahmedabad, secured a search warrant from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, and searched the house of the appellant in the presence of the Panchas. In the search 34 one rupee coins, with the mark of King George the 6th on One side and with the mark of lion on the other side, one piece of metal, metal powder, three half anna coins with sharp edges, one die and two one rupee genuine coins of the year 1947 were found. At that time, the wife and daughters-in-law of the appellant were present. The appellant and the three women,. who were in the house of the appellant, were prosecuted, but the three women were acquitted and the appellant was c...
Alamkhan Umarbhai Vs. the State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-16-1960
Reported in: (1961)2GLR70
N.M. Miabhoy, J.1. Appellant Alamkhan Umarkhan has been convicted for the offence under Section 304, Part I, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surat.2. The appellant was tried for the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code on the allegation that on or about 26th of November 1958 at Olpad, he committed the murder of one Hussein alias Kalu Mahomed by causing him injuries with knife with the intention of causing him injuries sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.3. The prosecution evidence was that the deceased had four anti-mortem injuries. The corpse of the deceased was examined by Dr. Pesh Imam on 27-11-1958 at about 10-00 A.M. and the Doctor noticed the following injuries on the person of Kalu:(1) Horizontal stab wound 1 x 1. 1/2 x wall deep in the epigastna region with signs of bleeding:(2) One superficial incised wound 1/2 x 1/4 x 1/4 on the right side of umbilicus about 3 awa...
Chhanalal A. Patel, President, District Local Board, Mehsana Vs. State ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Guj27; (1960)GLR260
Desai, C. J. 1. This is a petition for a writ of prohibition directing the opponent, the State Government, not to proceed with an inquiry contemplated by a show cause notice dated 4th April 1960 issued In circumstances to be presently stated. The petitioner is the President of the District Local Board, Mehsana. He was also the President of a previously constituted Local Board. A District Local Board for Mehsana was constituted of elected members in 1957. The petitioner was an elected member of that Board and was elected its President 'and functioned as such from 12th July 1957 to 13th June 1958. There were changes in the boundaries of the district and the Local Board was dissolved by the State Government on 13th June 1958. On 14th June 1958, the District Local Board for Mehsana was reconstituted and the petitioner was one of the nominated members of that Board. At a meeting convened for the purpose, the petitioner was elected President of the reconstituted Local Board on 14th June 1958...
Kapilaben Chimanlal Kothari Vs. the Commissioner of Revenue, Baroda Di ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-14-1960
Reported in: (1960)1GLR233
J.M. Shelat, J.1. This and the three other petitions raise an important question of construction of Section 15(2)(e) of the Bombay District Municipal Act 1901 All these petitions have identical facts and raise a common question of law. It would be therefore convenient to cite the facts in petition No. 803/60 as facts typical to all the three other petitions and dispose of all the four petitions by a common judgment.2. In Special Civil Application No. 803/60 the petitioner was a duly elected councillor of the Municipality of Mehmedabad. On July 18 1959 the second opponent also a councillor of the municipality made an application under Section 15(3) of the Act to the Collector of Kaira stating therein that the petitioner had absented herself from the meetings of the municipality during four successive months and had consequently incurred disqualification laid down in Section 15(2)(e) of the Act. By his order dated 29th January 1960 the Collector held that the petitioner was not disabled ...
Govind Natha Vs. the State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Guj11; 1961CriLJ57; (1961)0GLR168
Miabhoy, J.1. Appellant Govind Natha has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Kutch at Bhuj, for the offence wider Section 304, Part, I, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and for the offence under Section 21, Indian Arms Act, and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. The learned Judge has ordered both the sentences to run concurrently.2. The first charge against the appellant was that, on or about 3-10-1959 at about 5-00 p. m. he committed the murder of one Aher Suthar Punja Mahisur at his, i.e. appellant's shop in the village Mirzapur, Taluka Bhuj, District Kutch. The second charge against the appellant was that, in contravention of a licence to possess 12 cartridges at a time, the appellant possessed, on the aforesaid date and time, 30 cartridges.3. A majority of the facts on which the prosecution has relied to establish the two charges against the appellant has been admitted by the appellant and those facts ...
Ramnath Agarwal Vs. G.S. Iyer, Collector of Customs, Kandla and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Guj51; (1960)GLR267
Desai, C.J.1. This petition raises a question of some importance relating to the interpretation and ambit of a limitative provision in Section 39 of the Sea Customs Act to be referred to by us hereinafter as 'the Act'. In view of the contentions urged at the bar on this question of limitation and other aspects of the matter, the facts require to he stated with some fullness. 2. In December 1957, the petitioner imported 380 cases of components of free wheels at port Kandla per S. S. Egidia. The petitioner in the usual course filed the Bill of Entry through his clearing agents along with the relevant documents. On 11th January 1958, the petitioner in answer to some inquiry made by the Customs Authorities supplied further information required of him. On 14th January 1958, the Customs Officer nude certain. endorsements on the Bill of Entry. Those endorsements are of considerable importance in appreciating the arguments advanced before us. In the column under the heading 'Value on which Dut...
Bai Jivatbai Jethmal Vs. Milkiram Deepchand and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-07-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ469
Raju, J.1. This is an appeal by one Bai Jivatbai agairtst the acquittal of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 by the learned Sessions Judge of Bhavnagar, who set aside their conviction by the learned First Class Magistrate Bhavnagar, who had convicted respondent No. 1 under Section 494, Indian Penal Code, for having contracted a marriage with respondent No. 2 during the life time of the first wife Bai Jivatbai, the complainant present appellant. He convicted respondent No. 2 for having abetted respondent No. 1 in the offence of contracting a second marriage with her.2. The appellant's case was that her husband, respondent No. 1 had on 28-7-57 contracted a second marriage with respondent No. 2 which was bigamous. She examined herself and witnesses to prove the second marriage of respondent No. 1 with respondent No. 2 and also to prove that there was no customary right of divorce in the community to which the parties belonged, viz., Sindhi Lohana. The defence was that the first marriage between re...
Bai Chandan W/O Shah Maneklal Himatlal Vs. Sheth Rajakbhai Karimbhai a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-07-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Guj9; (1961)GLR283
Raju, J. 1. This is a first appeal by the original plaintiff Bai Chandan, widow of Maneklal Himatlal, who filed a suit for a declaration that the suit property bearing Municipal No. 927 of Prantij, belongs to her and that her son, defendant No. 2 has no right, title or interest in it, and for an injunction to restrain defendant No. 1, who had obtained a decree against defendant No. 2, from selling it in Darkhast as Property of defendant No. 2. The suit has been dismissed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmedabad. 2. In the plaint, the plaintiff alleged that her husband Maneklal Himatlal, who had died in 1942, had made a gift in her favour in 1932 of the suit property, as he had married a third wife without the plaintiff's consent and in order to appease the plaintiff, who had objected the third marriage of Maneklal. The gift was registered on 27-6-32. Having learnt that the defendant No. 1 who had obtained a decree against her son, defendant No. 2, and had Put the suit house...
Bai Dahi and anr. Vs. Bai Sada and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-05-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Guj105; (1960)GLR201
Miabhoy, J. 1. In this appeal, the main question which requires to be decided is whether the two plaintiffs appellants are or are not entitled to challenge certain transactions entered into by Sada, defendant No. 1, according to the Baroda Hindu Code. The present suit was instituted by plaintiffs for a declaration that the transactions entered into by Sada were null and void, against their interests and not binding on them. The impugned transactions are a compromise entered into on 11-11-52 between Sada, defendant No. 1, on the one hand and Gajara, defendant No. 2, and Sharda, defendant No. 3, on the other; a gift made by Sada on 13-6-1953 in favour of defendant No. 4 and a sale made on 20-6-1953 in favour of defendant No. 5. The trial Court has dismissed the suit from which this appeal arises on the ground that plaintiffs were not the next reversioners of their father Nathabhai Trikambhai or the next reversioners of their brother Punjabhai Nathabhai and that, as such, according to the...
Manilal Maganlal and anr. Vs. Kalidas Manilal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-02-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Guj7; (1960)GLR190
ORDERP.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is a petition filed by the petitioners for an order that the petitioners be appointed guardians of the undivided share of the minor respondents in the property particularly described in Exhibit A to the petition and that the agreement of sale of the said property mentioned in the petition be sanctioned as being for the benefit of the minor respondents and that the petitioners as guardians be authorised to complete the sale on behalf of the minor respondents. The order is sought from this Court in the exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. When this petition was presented, I entertained some doubt as to whether this Court has inherent or general jurisdiction to appoint a guardian of the undivided share of a minor in a joint Hindu family and to sanction the sale on behalf of the minor. I, therefore, asked the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners to address full arguments to me on this point. Since the petition is at this stage ex parte, I requested...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›