Gujarat Court March 1961 Judgments
Sitaram Motiram JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-29-1961
Reported in: [1961]43ITR405(Guj)
K.T. Desai, C.J.1. The assessee in this case is Shri Sitaram Motiram Jain. He carried on business in the name and style of 'Motiram Sitaram Jain' as the sole proprietor thereof for a number of years. During the assessment year 1954-55, the accounting year being Samvat year 2009, the assessee suffered a loss in his business. He became entitled to carry forward the sum of Rs. 29,308 on account of such loss under the provisions of section 24(2) of the Income-tax Act. On 7 November, 1953, the assessee entered into a deed of partnership where under he admitted his brother Kirparam Motiram as his partner in the said business from Kartik Sub 1st, Samvat year 2010, i.e., 7 November, 1953. The shares of the assessee and Kirparam Motiram in the profit and loss of the partnership were respectively ten annas and six annas in a rupee. The deed of partnership shows that the capital required for the partnership business was to be provided by the assessee. It was further provided that the partnership ...
Tag this Judgment!Guriya Bucha Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-23-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj39
Raju, J. 1. This is a criminal appeal by one Guriya Bucha of Sanala, Taluka Chhota Udepur, who was convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, for having caused the death of one Bhikhala aged about 14 years on the afternoon of 25-3-1960.2. The prosecution case was that on that afternoon, the accused who is aged about 18 years, and the deceased, who was aged about 14 years, went out together to graze their cattle. At the time of returning in the evening, the accused asked the deceased to bring up all the cattle at oneplace to be taken home. The deceased refusedto do so and gave a stick blow on the leg of theaccused. The accused then shot two arrows atthe deceased injuring him in the chest. Thelatter fell down and thereafter the accused causedsome more injuries to the deceased, who diedwithin a very short time thereafter,* * * * * *3-8. In his examination at the Sessions trial, the accused pleaded not guilty. According to him, the deceased tried to commit unnatural offence against hi...
Tag this Judgment!Vallabh Alias Munna Govan Vs. the State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ540
V.B. Raju, J.1. This is an appeal by Vallabh alias Munna Govan, who was original accused No. 1 at the Sessions trial and who was convicted Under Section 304, Part I, IPC and sentenced to suffer R. I. for 7 years, by the learned Sessions Judge, Surat.2. The prosecution case was that the appellant had developed illicit intimacy with Vanita, the daughter of deceased Ghelabhai Atmaram; that Ghelabhai was adverse to their marriage and that on that account at about 10 P.M. on 9-2-60, the appellant and two others, who were accused Nos. 2 and 3 at the Sessions trial surrounded Ghelabhai and caused his death by inflicting serious injuries on him. Upon hearing the cries, Vinodchandra, the brother of the deceased and others came to the scene of offence. The deceased was taken on a cot to his house and Dr. Navalram was called. The Police Jamadar also came to the scene and recorded the complaint of Ghelabhai. Ghelabhai succumbed to his injuries on his way to a hospital. The inquest was made on 10-2...
Tag this Judgment!Raising Mohmia Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj203; (1962)0GLR152
Mehta, J. 1. This is an appeal against the conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baroda, on the appellant under Section 302, I. P. C. for the murder of one Nana Jeram and under Section 324, I. P. C. for causing hurt to one Bai Gujaliand sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and Rule I for one year respectively. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, jn brief may be put this way:The deceased Nana Jeram was living with his daughter-in-law Bai Gujali and her young son aged about 4 years in the village of Moti Sadha'lj in Chhotaudenur Taluka. Bai Gujali's husband had died 3 years before the date of the incident in the case, which took place on the 8th of March 1980. On the day in question i.e. 8th March 1960, while the deceased Nana Jeram and Bai Gujali were geting ready to sleep after haying taken their night meals and when her father-in-law was sitting on the cot it is the prosecution case that Bai Gujali saw two person...
Tag this Judgment!Himatsing Shivsing Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ415; (1961)GLR678
V.B. Raju, J. x x x x19. It is next contended that even assuming that an offence of theft had been committed, it Hoes not amount to robbery, because the injuries of Narsing and Karansing were inflicted after the completion of theft and not for the purpose ot facilitating the commission of the (theft. Reliance is placed on Bishambhar Nath v. Emperor A.I.R. 1941 Oudh 476.20. Theft amounts to 'robbery' if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft, the offender for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt Or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or or instant hurt, Or of instant wrongful restraint. Before theft can amount to 'robbery', the offender moist have voluntarily caused or attempted to cause to any person death or hurt Or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt) or of instant wrongful restraint. The Second nec...
Tag this Judgment!Kumbhar Narsi Bechar Vs. the State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj77; (1961)0GLR716
FACTS 1. This is a criminal appeal by one Kumbhar Narsi Bechar, who was convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, by the learned Sessions Judge Jamnagar, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Accused No. 2, who wag also tried along with him, was acquitted. The prosecution case was that out of revenge for an injury inflicted on him, Kumbhar Narsi the appellant inflicted a knife blow on the deceased Mahendra Prabhulal alias Bhola at about 9-15 at night on 5-3-60 near the shop of one Pragji Hemraj, Pragji, who was in his shop, saw the incident, although he did not go to the scene of offence. Jagdishchandra, a cousin of the deceased Mahendra, and his brother Ghandrakant happened to pass by the scene and they saw the injured, and when they inquired of him they were told by the injured that the appellant had stabbed him with a knife. The injured Mahendra was taken to Irwin Hospital, where he was admitted at 9-50 P.M. Two doctors recorded his dying declaration at 10-15 P.M. The Taluka...
Tag this Judgment!Amarshi Jeram Vs. Hazrat and Co. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Guj262; [1962(4)FLR340]; (1962)0GLR197; (1962)IILLJ187Guj
J.M. Shelat, J.Facts 1. The petitioner, working as a mechanic, at Bhadar Dam under the 1st opponents as the contractors, on a salary of Rs. 200/- per month mot with an accident at about 11-0 Hrs. on the night of 1-5-1956. When he was returning to his residence he fell in a ditch which was 12 to 15 ft. deep and where a foundation one had been laid. No lights were placed by the contractors near about the ditch so as to serve as a warning to persons walking nearby at night against falling into the ditch. As the accident took place when the petitioner was returning to his residence after his work, the workman must be said to have sustained injuries as a result of the accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. He received injuries to both of his legs and these injuries caused fractures to the bones near the ankles. The petitioner first took treatment from a bone setter and thereafter took treatment from a doctor. His case was that in spite of these and other treatments suc...
Tag this Judgment!Chimanlal Bhogilal Singh and anr. Vs. Pandurao Bhailal Desai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-09-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ329; (1962)GLR27
ORDERJ.M. Shelat, J.***5. Both Mr. Pathak and M.C.C. Patel appearing for the two petitioners agreed that the action taken by the learned Sessions Judge was on the report of the President of the Association (Ahmedabad Criminal Courts Bar Association - Ed.), which report as the Rojnama Indicate, was made on the 30th of June 1959. They argued that that report was on the basis of the resolution passed at the meeting of the 25th of June 1959. They contended that that meeting was not a specially convened meeting as required by the explanation to Section 36 of the Act (Legal Practitioners Act-Ed.) as the notice dated the 18th of June 1959 convening that meeting did not set out the list of persons against whom action was proposed to be taken. It was contended that in the absence of such a list in that notice, the members who were present at the meeting and who voted for the Resolution had no opportunity to consider and if necessary to make their own inquiries about the person or persons whethe...
Tag this Judgment!Maqanlal Bechardas Vs. Shah Kesharimal Dalichand and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-09-1961
Reported in: (1961)2GLR625
J.M. Shelat, J.1. This is a somewhat unusual Application in the sense that the petitioner, who in the executing Court took up the stand of having the auction sale held by the Court confirmed, has now taken a complete summersault and submitted that that very same auction sale which he wanted to have confirmed, should be set aside.2. The 2nd opponent obtained a money decree in suit No. 172 of 1953 on the 12th of October 1954 against the firm of Mody Dayaram Bechardas, in which firm the petitioner was a partner along with opponent No. 3. That was a consent decree. Under the decree a first charge was created in respect of the decretal amount on a house belonging to the judgment-debtors and an order of attachment before judgment of that house was issued when the suit was filed. The judgment-debtors failed to pay the decretal amount in accordance with the terms of the consent decree and, thereupon, the 2nd opponent took out execution proceedings, being Darkhast No. 72 of 1956 in the Court of...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Venishanker Kalidas Bhatt
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-06-1961
Reported in: (1962)3GLR33
V.B. Raju, J.1. This is an appeal by the State of Gujarat against the acquittal of the respondent who was charged with having committed an offence punishable under Section 34 of the Bombay Money Lenders Act for having contravened Section 18(2) of the same Act in that he did not send copies of the accounts in respect of three money-lending transactions dated 24-12-57 27 and 30-12-57 relating to loans advanced by him to Kisnad Group Co-operative Multi-purpose Society. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Broach who tried the case acquitted the respondent on the ground that a loan to a Co-operative society was not included in the definition of loan contained in Section 2(9) of the Bombay Money-Lenders Act. On this ground he acquitted the respondent although according to the Magistrate all the facts about the advancing of the loans were admitted by the respondent who was accused.2. In appeal it is contended by the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the State that the view taken...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »