Gujarat Court November 1961 Judgments
Dave Sadashiv Jaykrishna Vs. Rana Govubha Alias Velubha Jeshibhai and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-28-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR1007
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This Revision Application has been argued very strenuously by Mr. M.P. Thakkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant who was creditor No. 7 in a debt adjustment proceeding filed by the debtor under the provisions of the Saurashtra Agricultural Debtors Relief Act 1954 It appears that creditor No. 7 sold a house and 1/4th share in a certain piece of land to the debtor for Rs. 3 457 Creditor No. 7 handed over possession of the properties to the debtor but the debtor failed and neglected to pay the full price to creditor No. 7. Creditor No. 7 was therefore obliged to file a suit against the debtor in order to recover the balance of the price which remained to paid by the debtor to creditor No.7. The suit resulted in a decree for Rs. 2 350 together with interest and costs. Creditor No. 7 made an application for execution of the decree by attachment and sale of the properties which consisted of the house and 1/4th share in the land and these properties we...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Amratlal Maganlal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-24-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj261
RAJU, J. 1. This Criminal Appeal No. 302 of 1961 is a criminal appeal filed by the State against the order of acquittal of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 by. the Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Mehsana The appeal was admitted by a Division Bench of this Court on 28-6-61. The Government Pleader has now stated that respondent No. 1 is dead as he has been reported to be murdered. He, therefore, requests this Court to pass an order that Criminal Appeal No. 302 of 1961 abates as regards respondent No. 1 and that it should be decided, as regards respondent No. 2.2. Mr. Patel who appears for the respondents; urges that under Section 431, Criminal Procedure Code, the appeal abates as a whole. This section reads as follows :, 'Every appeal under Section 411-A Subsection (2), or Section 417, shall finally abate on the death of the accused, and every other appeal under this Chapter (except an appeal from a sentence, of fine) shall finally abate on the death of the appellant.'This section has not been...
Tag this Judgment!Lalu Jela and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-24-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj250
Raju, J. 1. This Criminal Appeal No. 395 of 1961 is filed by five persons, who were original accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 25 in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1961 tried by the Sessions Judge, Panch-Mahals. The learned Sessions Judge convicted the five appellants and hence this appeal. The appeal is before us for admission. 2. Under Section 410, Criminal Procedure Code, any person convicted on a trial by a Sessions Judge, or an Additional Sessions Judge, may appeal to the High Court. Section 419, Cri. Pro. Code provides that every appeal shall be made in the form of a petition in writing presented by the appellant or his pleader. The cumulative effect of Sections 410 and 419, Cri. Pro. Code is that every appellant should file a separate appeal in the form of a petition. If four persons P, Q, R and S are convicted on a trial held by a Sessions Judge, Section 410, Cri. P.C. provides that every one of these persons namely P or Q or R or S may appeal to the High Court and Section 419 provides that...
Tag this Judgment!Parikh Kalabhai Bodabhai and ors. Vs. the Village Panchayat of Patdi a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-23-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR897
J.M. Shelat, J.1. This petition is for a writ of quo warranto or a writ in the nature of quo warranto calling upon respondents 2 to 16 to state by what authority each of them supported his claim to the office of a member of the village panchayat of Patdi Village in the District of Surendranagar and for an injunction restraining respondents 2 to 16 from holding office as members of the first respondent panchayat and exercising powers as such members.By a notification No. 518/33B under Section 4 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act of 1933 the then Government of Bombay declared that the local areas comprising the revenue villages set out in that notification shall be villages with effect from November 1, 1940 The village Patdi was one of those villages so declared as villages under Section 4 of that Act. Patdi was then included in the taluka of Viramgam and that village was then a Political Saranjam Inami Village of Patdi estate and as such there was no other village in the estate of Patd...
Tag this Judgment!Rabari Khoda Mesur Vs. Shri Gajanan Sahkari Pedhi Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-21-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR512
K.T. Desai, C.J.1. This second appeal raises an important question of law in action with the period of limitation for execution of orders which are to be deemed to be decrees of a Civil Court on a certificate being signed by the Registrar under the provisions of Section 89(1)(a) of the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act 1925 In view of the importance of the matter Justice Bakshi before whom the matter first appeared has referred the same to a Division Bench.2. The facts giving rise to this second appeal briefly stated are the following: The respondent society is a co-operative society which was registered under the Baroda Co-operative Societies Act. The appellant was a member of that society. Disputes arose between the first respondent and the appellant. The same were referred to the Registrars nominee for decision under the provisions of the aforesaid Act. On 28th April 1942 the Registrars nominee made an award against the appellant as the principal debtor and against respondents 2 and...
Tag this Judgment!The Nadiad Borough Municipality Vs. Parikh Jitendra Kanaiyalal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-15-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR464
K.T. Desai, C.J.1. This Second Appeal has been referred by Mr. Justice Bhagwati for decision by a Division Bench of this Court having regard to the importance of some of the points involved in this appeal. The few facts necessary for the purpose of determining the points raised in this appeal are as under:2. The Nadiad Borough Municipality is the appellant in this appeal. On 5 May 1952 the municipality passed a resolution for levying Rs. 6/per annum per tenement as general water rate from those who were not paying the special water rate. On 15th May 1952 notices were issued by the municipality inviting objections to such levy. On 23rd July 1952 a resolution was passed by the municipality confirming the earlier resolution of 5th May 1952. It was also resolved to obtain the requisite sanction of the Government to such levy. On 26th February 1953 the Government granted its sanction to the levy of this rate upto 31st March 1954. On 27 February 1953 the municipality passed a resolution brin...
Tag this Judgment!Vala Punja and ors. Vs. Puna Mavji and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-14-1961
Reported in: AIR1963Guj112; (1962)GLR1021
ORDERR.B. Mehta, J.1. This is a civil revision application against an order passed by the learned Extra Assistant judge, Mehsana, sitting at Amreti, by which order the learned Extra Assistant Judge set aside an order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Jr. Dn. Amreli, by which the learned Civil Judge had dismissed an application made by a debtor under Section 4 or the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1947, holding against the debtor that the transaction which was the subject-matter of the application was not in the nature of a mortgage. 2. The facts leading to this revision application are this way. The applicant-debtor's case was that he had passed a conditional sale of his land Section No. 11, admeasuring 20 blghas and 3 vasas for a sum of Rs. 500/-on 11th November 1929, In favour of Vala Puna and Nanji Narshi, who were opponents Nos. 1 and 2. The applicant's allegation was that the real nature of this transaction was that of a mortgage and that these respondents had passed an ...
Tag this Judgment!Vali Isa Mahmed and anr. Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-13-1961
Reported in: AIR1963Guj135; 1963CriLJ755; (1962)GLR1052
Raju, J. 1. These are two criminal appeals. Cri. Appeal No. 191/61 is by the original accused No. 1 and Criminal Appeal no. 197/1961 is by the original accused No. 2 in Sessions Case No. 30 of 1960, decided by the learned Sessions Judge of Broach. That case was against four accused persons, and the two present appellants, who were accused Nos. 1 and 2 were convicted under Section 302 read, with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, for having committed the murder of one Shantilal Bhagwandas of Simartha at about 5-30 P. M. on 19-3-60. Accused Nos. 3 and 4 were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge.2. The prosecution case was that accused No. 1 was in the service of the deceased Shantilal for seven years and that on account of certain, suspicion against accused No. 1, deceased Shantilal removed him from service. On this account according to the prosecution case, accused No. 1 conspired with accused No. 2 and others to encompass the death of Shantilal. According to the prosecution, on 19-3-60 ...
Tag this Judgment!Motibhai Trikambhai Vs. Chhotalal Mangalbhai Parmar and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-01-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR506
K.T. Desai, C.J.1. In this case the petitioner is the landlord and respondents 1 and 2 are the tenants. The land let by the petitioner consists of survey No. 424 situate in Anand village admeasuring one acre and eight gunthas. The land was originally let to Mangalbhai Haribhai the father of the 1st respondent and husband of the second respondent. Respondents 1 and 2 are the heirs of the said Mangalbhai. Mangalbhai did not pay the rent in respect of the said land for the years 1956-57 and 1957-58 amounting to Rs. 48/The petitioner thereupon gave the requisite notice of termination of the tenancy of Mangalbhai and filed an application for possession of the land in the Court of the Tenancy Mahalkari at Anand. On 17th December 1958 the Tenancy Aval Karkun passed an order directing Mangalbhai to pay the amount of the arrears of rent being Rs. 48/and 50 naya paises by way of costs. He further directed that the amount should be paid within three months from the date of the receipt of the orde...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›