Gujarat Court December 1965 Judgments
State of Gujarat Vs. Shah Lakhamshi Umarshi and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Guj283; 1966CriLJ1420; (1966)0GLR130
ORDER1. These Revision Applications raise an interesting question, namely, whether in a case where an Investigating Officer investigating into a cognizable offence has or completion of the investigation submitted a final report as distinguished from a chare-sheet under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requesting that 'A', 'B' or 'C' Summary be issued, the Magistrate can direct the Investigating Officer to submit a charge-sheet if he disagrees with the recommendation of the police and takes the view that the facts set out in the final report constitute an offence and there is a case for placing the accused on trial. The question is one of some importance since it is likely to arise frequently before Magistrates and that is why the Revision Applications have been referred to a Full Bench by Bakshi and Vakil JJ. before whom they originally came up for hearing. The facts of each revision application are different but it is not necessary to set them out in detail for the purpos...
Tag this Judgment!Babubhai Shankerlal Soni and ors. Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1965
Reported in: (1967)8GLR453
N.G. Shelat, J.1. The suit from which this second appeal arises was instituted by the plaintiffs-appellants in the Court of the Civil Judge (S. D.) at Godhra for a declaration that the deceased Shankerlal was discharged from his liability as a surety, and that the State of Bombay and its officers, servants and agents were not entitled to attach and sell their joint family property, and for a permanent injunction restraining them from selling the same without obtaining the decree against them from a competent civil Court and for costs of the suit against the defendant-State-the respondent in this Court.2. The facts leading to this litigation do not appear to be much in dispute. On 26th September 1946 in an auction sale of the right to fell trees and remove wood and timber in the Ex-State of Deogadh Baria, held by the State, Patangdi Block No. 2 in Dudhia Mahal came to be purchased by one Abdulsatar Haji for Rs. 27, 225/-. Then in another similar auction sale held on 25th September 1947 ...
Tag this Judgment!Punamchandra Revashankar Joshi Vs. Ramjibhai Maganlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-23-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR807
N.K. Vakil, J.1. The petitioner in Civil Revision Application No. 13 of 1962 and Civil Revision Application No. 26 of 1962 was the original plaintiff ii Regular Civil Suit No. 16 of 1959. He had filed a suit against the presen opponent in both these revision applications for possession on the ground that, it was required bona fide for the personal use of starting a bookseller's business in the suit premises. The suit premises were a part of whole building which the petitioner had purchased sometime before he started the proceedings. After the suit was filed, the respondent had also filed a miscellaneous application to determine the standard rent. In the sui also the defendant-respondent had raised the contention that the agreed rent which was Rs. 22/- was not the standard rent. In the suit, on merit the trial Court decided in favour of the plaintiff. As regards the standard rent, the trial Court held that the standard rent was Rs. 8/- inclusive o all taxes. As regards the standard rent...
Tag this Judgment!Lalsing Keshrising Rehvar Vs. Vallahdas Shankerlal thekdi and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Guj62; (1966)GLR753
Miabhoy, J.(1) This appeal is filed under section 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Act 43 of 1951), (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by Lalsing Keshrising Rehvar whose election to a seat in the Gujarat Legislative Assembly has been declared under section 100(1)(b) read with section 123, sub-sections (2) and (3), to be void by Mr. A.A. Dave, the sole member of an Election Tribunal appointed under section 86 of the Act by his order, dated 29th December 1962, in an election petition filed by Vallabhdas Shankerlal Thekdi, respondent No. 1 herein. Sabarkantha District has been allotted one Parliamentary seat. This district consists of a number of talukas. These talukas were allotted between them six seats in the Gujarat State Legislative Assembly in the elections held in 1962, one Pashabhai Patel was one of the candidates for the Parliamentary seat. He was fighting the election on the ticket of the Swatantra Party. We are not directly concerned with the election to...
Tag this Judgment!Lalsing Keshrising Rehvar Vs. Vallabhdas Shankerlal thekdi and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR753
N.M. Miabhoy, J.1. This appeal is filed under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Act 43 of 1951), (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by Lalsing Keshrising Rehvar whose election to a seat in the Gujarat Legislative Assembly has been declared, under Section 100(1)(b) read with Section 123, Sub-section (2) and (3), to be void by Mr. A.A. Dave, the sole member of an Election Tribunal appointed under Section 86 of the Act by his order, dated 29th December 1962, in an election petition filed by Vallabhdas Shankerlal Thekdi, respondent No. 1 herein. Sabarkantha District has been allotted one Parliamentary seat. This district consists of a number of talukas. These talukas were allotted between them six seats in the Gujarat State Legislative Assembly. In the elections held in 1962, one Pashabhai Patel was one of the candidates for the Parliamentary seat. He was fighting the election on the ticket of the swatantra party. We are not directly concerned with the electio...
Tag this Judgment!Govindbhai Kalidas Patel (Deceased by His Heirs Kantilal and ors.) Vs. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR703
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari or an appropriate direction, order or writ for quashing and setting aside two orders passed by the Excise authorities, one dated 24th December 1960 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Baroda, and the other dated 1st August 1961 passed in appeal by the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda. The circumstances under which, these orders came to be passed were as follows.2. The petitioner carries on business as a Commission Agent in tobacco in village Dabhasar, Taluka Thasara, District Kaira, and holds a licence bearing No. L. 2. No. 45 under the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, for carrying on the said business. On or about 26th May 1959, a TPI Permit No. 126788 dated 26th May 1959 was issued by the Thasara M.O.R. authorizing the petitioner to transport 17 borries of tobacco weighing 18 Bengali Maunds 13 1/2 seers from his licensed warehouse at Dabhasar to one Mahadeo Nath...
Tag this Judgment!Sureshchandra Bhulabhai Jariwala and ors. (Heirs of Deceased Bbulabhai ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-17-1965
Reported in: (1967)8GLR1003
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. One Bhulabhai Natnubhai Jariwala, hereinafter referred to as the original petitioner, was the owner of a house bearing No. 3638 situate in Ward No. 7, Rampura, Surat. The respondent was a tenant of the original petitioner in respect of the first floor of the house to which we shall for the sake of convenience refer as the premises. According to the original petitioner the contractual rent of the premises was Rs. 14/-per month calculated according to the Hindu calendar. The respondent fell in arrears of rent from Kartak Sudi Samvat Year 2010 i. e., 7th November 1953 and failed to pay the arrears in spite of repeated demands made by the original petitioner. The original petitioner ultimately gave a notice to quit dated 12th April 1955 terminating the tenancy of the respondent with effect from Vaishakh Vad30, Samvat Year 2011, i.e., 21st May 1955, and calling upon the respondent to pay up the arrears of rent. The respondent by his letter in reply dated 14th April 1955 ...
Tag this Judgment!Rasulmiya Mohmed Umar and anr. Vs. Vora Sakurbhai Mohmed and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-16-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR656
A.R. Bakshi, J.1. The petitioners in this revision application preferred an application under Order 33, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking permission of the Court to file the suit in forma pauperis. The two petitioners claimed that they had one-third share in the suit properties and asked for reliefs for the partition of the properties and for possession of their one-third share therefrom. Petitioner No. 1 is the son of petitioner No. 2 and both of them claimed that they were incapable of paying the requisite Court fee in the suit for partition and possession of their share in the properties mentioned in the application. They filed a list of their movable properties which they valued at Rs. 375/- and in that application they valued the suit properties at Rs. 33000/-, but claimed that they were not possessed of sufficient means to pay the requisite Court fee in suit. Petitioner No. 1 was in service and was drawing Rs. 125/- as salary per mensum, but claimed that he had no suffic...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Casam Mohmad Ajam Ismail
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1965
Reported in: [1966]18STC482(Guj)
1. This appeal has been field by the original defendants as the appellate court had reversed the trial court's decree dismissing the plaintiff's suit and had decreed the plaintiff's claim by holding that the assessment order and the recovery certificate in question were invalid and without jurisdiction and by further restraining the defendants from recovering the sum of Rs. 4,743-12-0 on account of income-tax of the estate of the deceased, Mohmad Azam Ismail, for the assessment year 1942-43, on the strength of the assessment order and the recovery certificate in question. 2. The short facts which have given rise to this appeal are as under : One Mohmad Azam Ismail, who was a resident of Rander, died at Rander on 25th March, 1945, leaving as his heirs four sons and one daughter. The income-tax department had assessed him for his income-tax for the year 1941-42 during his lifetime, but did not take any step for the recovery of the amount of tax as it was barred by limitation. After his d...
Tag this Judgment!Keshvlal Manordas Patel and anr. Vs. Atmram Dajibhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Guj101
Bhagwati, J. (1) The short question that arises in these Revision Applications is as to what is the period of limitation for an application to set aside an ex parte award under Section 36 of the Bombay Agricultural Debts Relief Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to s the Act). The petitioners is these Revision Applications filed a suit being Civil Suit No. 377 of 1946 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ahmedabad, for a declaration that a transaction relating to a field bearing Survey No. 121 situate in Vastrapur Village, City Takluka, Ahmedabad District, though ostensibly a sale was really a mortgage and for redemption of such mortgage. The transactions was effected by the ancestors of the petitioners and original opponent No. 6 in favour of Narangbhai Hirachand sometime in 1901 and the filed forming the subject - matter of the transaction was thereafter sold by Naranbhai Hirachand to the ancestor of Opponents No. 1 to 4 sometimes in 1914. It appears that thereafter the re...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »