Gujarat Court October 1961 Judgments
State of Gujarat Vs. Gordhandas Keshavji Gandhi and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-31-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj128; (1962)0GLR269
Desai, C.J. 1. This Special Full Bench has been constituted in order to consider the question relating to the binding nature of the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to 1st May, 1960, on this High Court. This very matter was considered by a Full Bench of three Judges of this Court including the then Chief Justice in the case of Anand Municipality v. Union of India, reported in : AIR1960Guj40 . Later on, a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Mr. Justice Raju and Mr. Justice Bakshi found it difficult to accept the view expressed by the Full Bench in the aforesaid case and made a request for referring the question to another Full Bench for a re-consideration of the matter. It was held by the Full Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case of (1960) 1 Guj LR 82 : (AIR 1960 Gujarat 40) (FB) that the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to the 1st of May, 1960, i. e., the day on which the State of Gujarat came into being fell within the ambit of the words...
Tag this Judgment!Firm of Habibbhai Gulam Mohmad Vs. the Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-31-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR924
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This Second Appeal arises out of a suit filed by the appellants for an injunction against the Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad which is the respondent before me seeking to restrain the respondent from demolishing the temporary structures standing on Survey No. 2 Plot Nos. 7 and 8 situate In Kalupur Ward Ahmedabad. Prior to 1st July 1950 the Bombay Municipal boroughs Act 1925 applied to the City of Ahmedabad and for the Municipal Borough of Ahmedabad there was the Ahmedabad Borough Municipality governed by the provisions of the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act 1925 The appellants applied to the Chief Officer of the Ahmedabad Borough Municipality sometime in 1945 for permission to erect temporary structures on land bearing Survey No. 2 Plot Nos. 7 and 8 in Kalupur Ward Ahmedabad. It appears that the Committee of Management of the Ahmedabad Borough Municipality had passed a resolution dated 16th March 1945 authorizing the Chief Officer to grant permission to persons int...
Tag this Judgment!Modi Fulchand Narsida Vs. Navnitlal Ranchhoddas and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-27-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj295
ORDERV.B. Raju, J.1. This civil revision application is dismissed, because the finding of the Court below that an application to adjudicate the Opponents as insolvents does not lie because the claim for damages for breach of contracts relating to forward business was not a debt within the meaning of Section 9(1)(b) of the Provincial Insolvency Act is correct, it is correct because a claim for damages does not amount to a debt unless the damages are ascertained by la Court. There is, therefore, no question of illegality or material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction.2. The application is therefore, dismissed with costs....
Tag this Judgment!Allanur Rasulla Vs. Balchand Ramji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-27-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR182
V.B. Raju, J.1. The petitioner in this Civil Revision Application was the original defendant. A decree for eviction was passed against him in respect of the suit premises on the ground that the opponent who had purchased the premises on 5-9-1956 had required them reasonably and bona fide for his occupation and also on the ground that the petitioner-tenant who was a monthly tenant was in arrears of rent for a period of six months or more and he had neglected to make payment thereof before the expiration of one month after notice referred to in Section 12(2) of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act 1947 which will hereinafter be referred to as the Act. The decree passed by the trial Court was confirmed in appeal by the Assistant Judge for Himatnagar at Ahmedabad and hence this revision application.2. The points contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner will be dealt with seriatim. The first contention is that no notice had been given as required by Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Fatemahomed MahamadhusseIn Barafwalla Vs. Bai Jinatbibi D/O Mahamad Ha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-27-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR1018
V.B. Raju, J.1. Holding that the petitioner in this revision application who was admittedly a tenant of the opponent, had sub-let a portion of the premises iet to him and was charging rent from the sub-tenant, which was in excess of the standard rent and permitted increases In respect of the part the Courts below have decreed the suit for ejectment filed by the opponent against the present petitioner. Under Section 13(1)(j) of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act 1947 which will hereinafter be referred to as the Act a landlord is entitled to recover possession of any premises if the Court is satisfied that the rent charged by the tenant for the premises or any part thereof which are sublet before the commencement of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control (Amendment) Ordinance 1959 is in excess of the standard rent and permitted increases in respect of such premises or part or that the tenant has received any fine premium other like sum or considera...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhudas Uttamdas Vs. Lavar Bai Uji Wd/O Lavar Godad Atmaram and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-26-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR919
V.B. Raju, J.1. The applicant in this revision application challenges the order of Civil Judge Junior Division Chanasma granting installments after the passing of a preliminary decree in a mortgage suit and before the passing of a final decree. The order of installments was passed under Section 24 of the Money-Lenders Act and it is contended that this section has no application at the stage before the final decree is passed. It is however contended by the learned Counsel for the opponent that the word decree in Section 2 Civil Pro. Code includes a preliminary decree and that therefore the word decree in Section 23 of the Money-Lenders Act includes a preliminary decree. Section 24 of the Money-Lenders Act reads as follows:Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 the Court may at any time on application of a judgment-debtor after notice to the decree-holder direct that the amount of any decree passed against him whether before or after the date on which this...
Tag this Judgment!Tribhovandas Somabhai Patel Vs. Umedbhai Shivabhai Patel and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-26-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR1017
V.B. Raju, J.1. This revision application is directed against the order of 2nd joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Surat, passed in Civil Misc. Application No. 212 of 1958, directing that a decree should be passed in terms of an award. The order was passed on an application given by the arbitrator, who was appointed by the parties by a private agreement. A reference to private arbitration was made after the suit had been instituted but without any reference by the Court under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act. It is therefore contended that such an award during the pendency of a suit without an order of reference by the Court as contemplated in Section 21 of the Arbitration Act is bad, and the Court was not right in passing a decree in terms of such an award. This contention is 9bviously correct in view of the provisions of Section 21 of the Arbitration Act. Reference may be made to Jagaldas Damodar and Co. v. Purshottam tfmedbhai and Co. : AIR1953Cal690 No authority in support oi the ...
Tag this Judgment!Surrottambhai Purshottambhai Hathising Vs. Ravichand Umedchand
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-25-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR1013
V.B. Raju, J.1. This application is directed against the judgment and order of the District Judge' of Ahmedabad who, in revision application No. 7 of 1957 before him against the order of the Small Cause Court Judge, fixing the standard rent of the premises in question held that the decision of the Small Cause Court Judge based as it was on affidavits was not in accordance with law and therefore remanded the matter to the trial Court for disposal according to law. It is an admitted fact that both the parties produced affidavits and did not produce any oral evidence. They also produced documents. The trial Court fixed the standard rent after considering the affidavits and the documents produced by both the sides. The learned District Judge observed as follows:I must confess that I am unable to understand how the Judge could decide as to whether he should believe one affidavit or other. He had not the opportunity of seeing any one in the witness-box and when he believes a particular affid...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Chhagan Raghav Vs. Bharwad Pola Chugha and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-25-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR894
R.B. Mehta, J.1. This is a criminal reference by the learned Sessions Judge Bhavnagar for quashing an order made by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Vallabhipur Umrala. It relates to the jurisdiction of a Nyaya Panchayat constituted under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act 1958.The matter arises this way the complainant one Chhagan Raghav filed a complaint against one Bharwad Pola Ghugha and 2 others on charges of mischief under Section 426 and criminal trespass under Section 447 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears that the offences were alleged to have been committed in the village of Chogath within the jurisdiction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Vallabhipur Umrala. The learned Magistrate having entertained the complaint issued summons to the accused. Thereupon the accused made an application before the learned Judicial Magistrate contending that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the Nyaya Panchayat Chogath had...
Tag this Judgment!Raval Prabhulal Bapalal Vs. Bai Godavri W/O. Dhirajram Kripashankar an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-24-1961
Reported in: AIR1963Guj183
ORDERR.B. Mehta, J. 1. This is a civil revision application against an interlocutory order made by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kadi, by which order on the application of opponent No. 2 in this revision application (who was second defendant in the suit) an issue which was raised was deleted. The deletion of this issue has the effect of substantially affecting the rights of the parties in the suit as it relates to a point of 'res judicata'.2. The matter arises this way. On 10th June 1951, by a registered deed of gift, one Bai Godavri, widow of one Dhirajlal Kripashanker, who is the first opponent in this revision application and also defendant No. 1 in the suit made a gift of the property in the suit to the applicant Raval Prabhulal Bapalal, who is the plaintiff In the suit and one Bal Shivganga jointly. Bai Shivganga was a sister of the husband of Godavri. Sometime after the execution of this deed, Bai Shivganga died with the result that under the deed of gift the plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »