Gujarat Court August 1964 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.
Mafatlal Manilal Shah Vs. C.C. Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Guj180; 1965CriLJ98; (1965)0GLR592
ORDER(1) A criminal complaint filed on behalf of the Municipality of Kalol was dismissed and the accused were acquitted on the ground that the complainant was absent when he was called out. On the same day, a few hours later, the complainant gave an application stating that he was present in the Court and did not hear of his name being called out. He, therefore, prayed that the complaint, which was dismissed under Sec.247, Cr.P.C., should be restored, but the learned Magistrate rejected the request. Hence this revision application by the original complainant.(2) Section 247, Cr.P.C. reads as follows:-'If the summons has been issued on complaint and upon the day appointed for the appearance of the accused, or any day subsequent thereto to which the hearing may be adjourned, the complainant does not appear, the Magistrate shall notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, acquit the accused, unless for some reason he thinks proper to adjourn the hearing of the case to some other day:...
State of Gujarat Vs. Soni Champaklal Somabhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Guj246; 1965CriLJ497; (1964)GLR981
ORDER(1) learned Sessions Judge, Broach, recommends that the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jambusar, refusing to allow the prosecution to examine its witness one Mr. Goehel, P.S.I, be set aside. The learned Magistrate refused permission to the prosecution to examine the witness on the ground that the statement was not supplied to the accused as required by section 173 of the Cr.P.Code.(2) If we turn to section 251-A of the Cr. P.Code, it is clear that the Magistrate is bound to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. At the same time, we must remember the provision of sub-s. (4) section 171 of the Cr. P.Code. Under that sub-section the police are bound to give copies of all statement recorded under the sub-section (3) of section 161 of the Cr. P.Code of all persons whom the prosecution must as its witnesses. Ordinarily, the prosecution must record the statements of all witnesses whom it proposes to examine as its witnesses. In t...
Mehramansinhji Alias Mahammmed Masood JalulluddIn Thakore Vs. the Stat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-1964
Reported in: (1965)6GLR655
J.B. Mehta, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment and decree dated 13 August 1958 of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Broach in Civil Suit No. 4 of 1956 by which he has dismissed the plaintiffs suit. The plaintiff had claimed a declaration that the plaintiffs suit lands are of his absolute ownership and are not Taluqdari lands as defined by the Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act 1949 hereinafter referred to as the Act and that he is liable only to pay as revenue a fixed sum of Rs. 9379-6-3 a permanent injunction restraining the defendant-State Government and their agents and servants from applying the provisions of Section 5(1)(a) and (b) and Section 4 of the Act to the suit lands and further restraining them from levying assessment on the suit lands in accordance with the Bombay Land Revenue Code hereinafter referred to as the Code and the rules made thereunder and from entering the plaintiffs name in the record of rights as an occupant. The plaintiff had also claimed an in...
Hatima Ebrahim and ors. Vs. Isabai Abdul Karim and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Guj156; (1964)GLR1021
Bhagwati, J. (1) The short question that arises in this appeal is whether the Claims Commissioner under the Railways Act, 1890, has power to apportion compensation in respect of loss occasioned by the death of a passenger amongst the dependents of the deceased, when the application for compensation is made only by one of the dependents. The deceased Ebrahim Abdul Karim was serving as a sepoy in Military Brass Band and whilst he was travelling by 35 Up Kirti Express on 21st May 1958, he met with his death as a result of derailment which occurred at a place called Chamarj. Bai Zubeda who was the widow of the deceased thereupon made an application to the Claims Commissioner appointed under Section 82-B of the Railways Act for compensation for loss occasioned by the death of the deceased. The amount of compensation which she claimed from the railway administration was Rs.30,000/- and in support of the said claim she set out in the application that the deceased was in good health and was on...
Thakkar Kalyanji and ors. Vs. Thakkar Liladhar Chhanganlal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Guj204; (1965)0GLR44
Mehta, J. (1) This revision application is against the decision of the Taxing Officer as to the correct court fee payable on a memorandum of appeal filed by the mortgage against a decree in which it was declared that the mortgages were not binding on the 1/8th share of the plaintiffs. (2) The short facts which have given rise to this petition are as follows: --(3) The plaintiffs are the heirs of one deceased Liladhar Chhaganlal. The father off the deceased Liladhar was one Chhhaganlal. Sunderji who left behind him seven sons and one widow and so the share of the plaintiffs' father was 1/8th in the properties left by the said Chhganlal Sunderji. The other brothers of the deceased Liladhar were the original defendants 1 to 6. Those brothers had executed three mortgages Exs. 46 to 48 of different suit properties to secure different amounts. Defendant No. 1 had executed the said mortgages also as a guardian behalf of the minor plaintiffs. The said mortgages were in favour of then original ...
Chimanilal Bhogilal Pantene and anr. Vs. Chandanben Shah and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-11-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Guj207; (1965)GLR91
Mehta, J.(1) This revision petition raises an interesting question as to whether a trustee who has got no trust property in his hands could sue as a pauper on behalf of the trust, even he is possessed of sufficient means in his individual capacity. (2) One Mohanlal Nihalchand, the deceased, had made a will on 16th March 1949 by which he had given the interest to one Chanchalben and after her death the estate was to over to the various trusts. Chanchalben died on 18th September 1958. There were three executors of the will, one of whom was Laherchand who expired on 22nd April 1958. Therefore, the present two executors have filed a suit in forma paupers, as plaintiffs No. 1 and 2 as the trustees under the will against the main defendants 1 and 2. Defendants No 1 and 2 the testator's sister's daughter and defendant No 2 is her husband. The suit is for recovery of the properties of the trust in possession of the opponents worth about Rs. 36,000/-. Opponents Nos. 1 and 2 and the other oppone...
The Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad Vs. Jhaveri Keshavl ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-11-1964
Reported in: (1965)6GLR228
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. These appeals which are 306 in number arise out of several suits filed by various rate-payers against the Ahmedabad Municipality (hereinafter referred to as the Municipality) in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ahmedabad. The suits related to the levy of tax on open lands for the official years 1947-48 1948 1949 and 1950 Prior to 1st July 1950 the Municipality was a Borough Municipality governed by the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Boroughs Act). There were in force during the period upto 31st March 1947 the Valuation and Taxation Rules made by the Municipality under Section 58(j) and sanctioned by the Government by their Resolution dated 14th February 1931 under Section 76 prescribing various taxes leviable by the Municipality. It appears that sometime prior to 20th February 1947 the Municipality at a General Meeting passed a Resolution selecting tax on open lands for being levied by the Municipality and approving ...
The State of Gujarat Vs. Muniruddin, Shabhuddin
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-1964
Reported in: 1966CriLJ210
V.B. Raju, J.1. This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondent, who was prosecuted under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The prosecution case was that the respondent was a foreigner and he had stayed in India beyond the time granted in a Residential Permit, which was issued to him, permitting him to stay in India upto 20th June, 1962, The Residential Permit has been produced. In view of the provisions of Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, the burden of proving that a person is not a foreigner is on the person who says that he is not a foreigner, namely, on the respondent. Foreigner, as defined in the Foreigners Act means a person, who is not a citizen of India. Therefore, the respondent had to prove that he was a citizen of India. In order to prove that he is a citizen of India, the respondent relied on a birth certificate of 1926, showing that a son was born to Shahbuddin Allauddin on 7th November 1926 at Borsad. There is evidence to show that the birth c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›