Gujarat Court August 1965 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.
Solanki Kalabhai Gagabhai and anr. Vs. the State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR351
J.M. Shelat, C.J.1. This is a petition for an appropriate writ, direction or order setting aside the notification dated February 7, 1961, issued by the Collector, Kaira, declaring nine persons as constituting the Village Panchayat of village Masra in Thasara Taluka. It appears that on March 14, 1956, the State Government declared by a notification under Section 4 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, the village Masra to be a village within the meaning of that section. The village thereafter was divided into three wards, and each ward was to have three members, the total thus of the panchayat's members being nine. Two of the nine seats were reserved for women. Under the Village Panchayats Election Rules, 1959, the Mamlatdar issued a notification declaring therein the various stages of the election which was to be held on November 9, 1960. For our purposes, it is sufficient to state that under the notification the date of filing nomination papers was October 25, 1960 and the nomin...
Shah Chhabildas Mangal Das (Manager of Joint Hindu Family of the Decea ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1965
Reported in: (1965)6GLR893
N.M. Miabhoy, J.1. The only question which is raised in this Second Appeal is about the correctness of the decision recorded by the two Courts that the instrument dated 30th December 1951 was a promissory note within the meaning of the Indian Stamp Act 1899 (XI of 1899) (hereafter called the Act) and as such inadmissible in evidence. Plaintiff-appellant brought the suit from which the Second Appeal arises for recovering a sum of Rs. 769-4-0 from defendant respondent The claim was based on the aforesaid document dated 20th December 1951 When the document was sought to be got admitted in the trial Court defendant raised an objection that as the document was a promissory note within the meaning of Section 2 Sub-section (22) of the Act and as it was not stamped as required by Article 49 of the Act the same was not admissible in evidence under Section 35 of the Act. This contention was upheld by the trial Court and on that finding the suit of plaintiff was dismissed. Plaintiff preferred an ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›