Gujarat Court July 1966 Judgments
Gordhandas Madhavji and ors. Vs. Valmji Khetsi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-29-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Guj276; (1967)0GLR307
Bhagwati, J.(1) The defendants in this appeal complain against a decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jamnagar, making the decretal amount payable by instalments of Rs. 5,000/- per year and awarding interest on the decretal amount at the rate of nine per cent per annum from the date of the decree till payment. The complaint of the defendants is that the instalments should have been for a smaller amount and that the interest should not have been awarded at a rate exceeding six per cent per annum from the date of the decree to the date of payment. The plaintiff s filed the present suit against the defendants to recover a sum of Rs.34,627.11 Ps together with interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum being the amount due under a Khata executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs' claim was resisted by the defendants on various technical grounds but they were all negatived by the learned Trial judge and there is no controversy about them in the ...
Tag this Judgment!Vrajlal Tarachand Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-28-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Guj225; 1967CriLJ1325; (1966)7GLR1085
ORDER(1) The applicant in this revision application is the Manager of a concern known as Junagadh Iron Industry. An application was made to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Junagadh Division under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for closing the above factory of the applicant was causing nuisance. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Junagadh passed an order on 19th January 1966 that the applicant should stop the use of electrically operated hammers that were worked in the factory. Against this order, the applicant preferred a revision application to the District Magistrate, Junagadh who rejected the revision application on the ground that no revision application could be preferred under Section 438-A Criminal Procedure Code in respect of an order passed under Section 133 of that Code. This order was passed by the District Magistrate on 8th March 1966. The applicant has preferred the present revision application against the aforesaid order of the district Magistrate. The applicant...
Tag this Judgment!Wasoo Enterpriser and ors. Vs. J.J. Oil Mils
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-26-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Guj57; (1968)GLR376
Bhagwati, J.1. This is an appeal against a decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhavanagar, directing defendants Nos. 1, 3 and 4 to pay to the plaintiffs Rs. 12,879-7-0 as and by way of damages for breach of a contract dated 14th August 1954 alleged to have been committed by them. The plaintiffs are a partnership firm and they carry on business of manufacture and sale of groundnut oil in Bhavanagar. The first defendants are also a partnership firm on which the original defendant No. 2 and defendant No. 3 were at the material time partners. The fourth defendants are a Limited Company carrying on business in Hongkong. On or about 14th August 1954, as a result on negotiations which took place between Messrs. D. N. Marshall and Company acting as broker for the plaintiffs on the one hand and the first defendants on the other, a contract was entered into between the plaintiffs and the first defendants for sale of 50 tonnes of groundnut oil packed in sound second-hand 40/45 gall...
Tag this Judgment!C.C. Basu Vs. Patel Dahyabhai Vaghjibhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-26-1966
Reported in: (1967)8GLR123
B.J. Divan, J.1. The opponents in both these Civil Revision Applications are the same. The petitioners in the two Civil Revision Applications are different. The opponents in both these Civil Revision Applications are the landlords and the petitioners in each of these Civil Revision Applications are the tenants occupying different portions of the same building, which is situated at Baroda. The plaintiffs had filed two suits against these two different tenants for recovery of possession of the premises in suit and the suits were originally filed in the Court of the Civil Judge, Sr. Dn., Baroda. Thereafter both these suits were transferred. So far as the suit from which Civil Revision Application No. 197 of 1966 arises is concerned, it was transferred to the Court of the 5th Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., Baroda, and so far as the suit from which Civil Revision Application No. 106 of 1966 arises is concerned, it was transferred to the Court of the 6th Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., Baroda. Whil...
Tag this Judgment!Balwantsingh Bhimsingh Vs. Inspector-general of Police [Rama Ayyar (N. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-13-1966
Reported in: (1966)7GLR1101; (1966)IILLJ517Guj
Miabhoy, C.J.1. This is a petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, in which the main point for consideration is whether the revisional power over an acquittal order conferred on the Inspector-General of Police, by an amendment introduced on 4 January, 1962 in rule 17 of the Bombay Police (Punishments and Appeals) Rules, 1956 (hereafter called the rules), has or has not retrospective action. Petitioner, Balwantsingh Bhimsingh was, at the relevant time, an unarmed policy constable attached to the Dabhoi Police station. On 9 May, 1961, an incident took place in which a bribe is alleged to have been taken by another member of the police force in the presence and with connivance of petitioner. On 12 July, 1961, petitioner was suspended. On 18 July, 1961, petitioner and two more constables were chargesheeted, the charge being that they had committed gross dereliction of duty and moral turpitude involving corruption on 9 May, 1961 inasmuch as petitioner and those two oth...
Tag this Judgment!Mansukhlal Tribhovan Joshi Vs. Nagarwala (J.D.), Inspector-general of ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-08-1966
Reported in: (1967)ILLJ454Guj
Miabhoy, C.J.1. Petitioner, Mansukhlal Tribhovan Joshi, has filed this petition, challenging certain orders by which he was dismissed from police service. Petitioner prays for a declaration that the enquiry proceedings preceding his dismissal were illegal, for setting aside the impugned orders and for an order of reinstatement into police service. 2. Petitioner was, at the relevant time, an unarmed head constable. Respondent 4, Jethva, was, at the relevant time, Sub-divisional Police Officer, Surendranagar District. Respondent 3 was the District Superintendent of Police at the same place. Respondent 2 was the Deputy Inspector. General of Police, Rajkot Range, and respondent 1 was the Inspector-General of Police. Respondent 4 was entrusted, on 17 June, 1958 with a preliminary enquiry against petitioner in regard to an alleged love affair with one Ushakumari. Respondent 4 made his report on 2 July, 1958, whereupon respondent 3 ordered that petitioner should be charge-sheeted in that rega...
Tag this Judgment!Thakorlal Parshottamdas Vs. Chandulal Chunilal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Guj124; (1966)7GLR970
ORDER(1) There was a dispute between the petitioners and the respondents in regard to the question whether the petitioners was entitled to go through one he rooms on the fist floor let out by the petitioners to the respondents for the purpose of having access to the second floor which was in the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner filed a suit against the respondent in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Baroda seeking an injunction restraining the respondents from obstructing the petitioner is going to the second floor through the room on the fist floor which was in the possession of the respondent. After filing the suit the petitioner applied for an interim injunction and on the application of the petitioner and interim injunction was granted by the learned trial Judge on 24th September 1960 restraining the respondent from obstructing the petitioner in going through the room on the fist floor for the purpose of having access the second floor with this qualificatio...
Tag this Judgment!Nadoda Khima Keshar Vs. State of Bombay (Now Gujarat) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-1966
Reported in: (1967)8GLR489
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This Revision Application arises out of a debt adjustment application preferred by the petitioner and it raises a short question of construction of Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act. On 26th April 1954 the petitioner executed a sale deed in favour of one Magan Jiva purporting to sell a field bearing Survey No. 136 situate in Wadhwan City, Surendranagar District. The price that was paid by Magan Jiva to the petitioner for the field was Rs. 2, 200/-. The petitioner thereafter preferred an application for adjustment of his debts under Section 4 of the Saurashtra Agricultural Debtors Relief Act 1954 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Wadhwan. Magan Jiva was impleaded as creditor No. 4 in the application. The petitioner alleged that the transaction embodied in the sale deed dated 26th April 1954 was in the nature of a mortgage and he claimed adjustment of the debt due under the mortgage and possession of the field from Magan Jiva. Magan Jiva...
Tag this Judgment!AlihusaIn Abbahbai and ors. Vs. Collector, Panch Mahats
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Guj118; (1967)8GLR311
ORDER(1) This Revision application raises a short but interesting question of law, namely whether a Reference under Section 18 of the land Acquisition Act abates if the applicant dies and his heirs do not make an application for bringing themselves on record within a period of 90 days from the date of the death of the applicant. The dispute in this Revision Application concerns land bearing Survey No. 56B-12/1 admeasuring 1 acre 25.12 gunthas situate in Dohad in the Panchmahals District. The land belonged to three brothers namely, Abbasabhai, Hathimbahai and Taherbhai each having 1/3 share in the land, in or about 1956 the land was acquired by the State Government under the provisions of the land Acquisition Act for the purpose of State Transport Corporation and after going through the procedure prescribed by law, the Collector, Panchamahals District, made an award dated 23rd September 195; offering compensation at he rate of Rs. 2.62 Np. Per square yard for the land. All the three bro...
Tag this Judgment!Ranchhodbhai Somabhai Vs. Nagarwala (J.D.), Inspector-general of Polic ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-01-1966
Reported in: (1966)0GLR1091; (1969)IILLJ59Guj
Miabhoy, C.J.1. Petitioner, Ranchhodbhai Somabhai, has filed this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 read with Art. 311 of the Constitution of India. He challenges in this petition a notice, dated 21 September 1963, issued by respondent who was, at the relevant time, the Inspector-General of Police, Gujarat State, calling upon petitioner to show causes why the order dated 26 February 1963, passed by his subordinate, the Deputy Inspector-General reducing petitioner from the post of a II grade head constable to that of a III grade head constable, for a period of six months, should be set aside and why petitioner should not be dismissed from police service. 2. The facts leadings up to the present petition may at first be briefly stated. Petitioner was, at the relevant time, an unarmed head constable, II grade, posted at Bhalej police station, Kaira district. In the month of December 1961, the petitioner was charge-sheeted by the District Superintendent of Police, Kaira district, on the alle...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »