Gujarat Court September 1966 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.
Saraswatiben D/O Manilal Mavsang Vs. Thakorlal Himatlal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-12-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Guj263; 1967CriLJ1632
V.B. Raju, J.1. On a police report, the learned Magistrate took cognisance of a case, and under Section 251-A(2) of the Cr. Pro. Code he discharged the applicant, who was one of the accused; but later on In fee course of the trial against the other accused, the learned Magistrate thought it necessary toframe a charge against the present applicant. He, therefore, passed an order saying that he would take cognisance of offence under Section 190(c), Cri. Pro. Code. So he ordered a process to issue against the present applicant.2. In Revision, it is contended that once cognisance taken, it cannot be taken again and once an order of discharge is passed, me same Magistrate cannot go behind the discharge order unless the appellate Court or revisional Court modifies the order of discharge. These arguments are not sound, because what the Magistrate takes is a cognisance of offence and not of a case. It is, therefore, not necessary to take cognisance again under Section 190(c) of Cr. P. C. The c...
Manilal Chhaganlal Desai Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Owning Western R ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-12-1966
Reported in: (1967)8GLR436
J.B. Mehta, J.1. These two appeals arise from a common judgment and involve common questions of facts and law and, therefore, they are being disposed of by me by this common judgment.2. The plaintiff had filed two suits against the defendants for recovery of two sums of Rs. 8, 015-14-0 and Rs. 7, 544-14-0 as and by way of damages due to abnormal delay in transit and consequent fall in market in respect of the goods ordered by him. The plaintiff's case was that the plaintiff Manilal Chhaganlal Desai was the sole owner of business running in the name and style of A. M. Brothers at Jetpur. The plaintiff had booked two consignments of 55 and 50 cases of tea from Jadabpur in West Bengal which is known as Eastern Railway for conveyance and safe delivery to the plaintiff at Jetpur station which is in the Western Railway. The first consignment of 55 boxes weighed 4950 lbs. while the second consignment of 50 boxes weighed 4750 lbs. The rate as per the invoices for both those consignments was Rs...
C.J. Shah Vs. Chhabalal Ganpatlal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-10-1966
Reported in: 1968CriLJ253
V.B. Raju, J.1. This is an appeal by the Food Inspector, Godhra Borough Municipality, against the acquittal of respondent No. 1 under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, One of the main grounds of acquittal is that the rules made by the Gujarat Government under Section 24 of that Act were not framed after the previous publication but the previous publication was made by the Bombay Government and not by the Gujarat Government. In answer to this, the learned Counsel for the appellant relies on Clauses (1) and (5) of Section 23 of the General Clauses Act. The whole Section 23161 reads as follows:23. Provisions applicable to making of rules or by-laws after previous publication.- Where, by any Central Act or Regulation, a power to make rules or byelaws is expressed to be given subject to the condition of the rules or byelaws being made after previous publication, then the following provisions shall apply, namely:(1) the authority having power to make the rules or byelaws...
Shri Prithvi Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Broach Borough Municipality and ors ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-10-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Guj124; (1970)0GLR226
Miabhoy, C.J. (1) These two petitions raise common questions of law and some common questions of fact. Each of the petitions has a common petitioner and a set of common respondents. Therefore, both the petitions were heard together and a common argument was addressed by learned counsel on both sides. With their consent, we are writing this common judgment which would dispose of both the petitions. (2) The two petitions challenge the validity of a house tax imposed by the Broach Borough Municipality and embody prayers for issuance of a writ of mandamus, a direction or an order for restraining respondents, their agents and servants from enforcing the tax, and the provisions of law under which the tax is sough to be levied from petitioner.(3) The facts which are required to be stated to dispose of the two petitions are as follows: In both the petitions the common petitioner is Prathvi Cotton Mills Ltd., a company registered under the Indian Companies Act VII of 1913 (hereinafter called pe...
The State of Gujarat Vs. Babusing Medasingh and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-09-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Guj282; 1967CriLJ1634; (1968)0GLR74
Vakil, J.(1) This criminal appeal is filed by the State against the order of the City Magistrate, 10th Court, Ahmedabad, in Summary Case No. 541 of 1964, whereby the two respondents were acquitted of the charges under Section 4 and 5 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887. Before this appeal could be heard, on 13th June 1965, Respondent No. 1 (Original accused No. 1) has died. His death certificate is produced and the learned Assistant Government Pleader, Mr. G.T. Nanavati, appearing for the Appellant - State, concedes that Respondent No. 1 has died. So we have now to consider the appeal against Respondent No. 2 only.(2) On the 12th of December 1963, Police Inspector B.F. Jadeja, suspecting that in the house of deceased Respondent No. 1, he and Respondent No. 2 were gaming, raided the house in the presence of the Panchas. The prosecution case was that they were found taking Satta-betting i.e. gambling on American futures. Both the Respondents were found sitting on a carpet. Res...
Dahyalal Bapulal Raval and ors. Vs. Patan Municipality, Patan
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-03-1966
Reported in: (1967)0GLR167; (1968)ILLJ160Guj
Sarela, J.1. All these five second appeals raise some common questions of law and have been argued together and will, therefore, be disposed of by a common judgment. In the course of the judgment we shall deal with the facts of each appeal separately. In all the appeals the respondent is the municipality of Patan (hereinafter referred to as the municipality). The municipality was the defendant in the five suits from which these five appeals arise. The plaintiffs in those five suits (who are the appellants in the five appeals) were the former employees of the municipality whose services were terminated by the municipality by resolutions of different dates to which we shall refer in due course. In each of those suits the plaintiff claimed a declaration that the resolution of the municipality terminating his services was illegal, void and of no effect and that it did not affect the continuance of his service and his service benefits and prayed for a perpetual injunction against the munici...
Rana Amersing Govindsing Vs. Rana Samatsingh Hathubha and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-03-1966
Reported in: (1968)9GLR220
N.M. Miabhoy, C.J.1. These two first appeals are directed against the decree, dated 23rd March 1959, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Surendranagar, in Civil Suit No. 2 of 1951 by which the learned Judge ordered partition of suit properties in terms of a Commissioner's report and rejected the claim made by defendant for future mesne profits in regard to common properties. First Appeal No. 667 of 1960 is by defendant and First Appeal No. 716 of 1960 is by plaintiffs. It is common ground that plaintiffs and defendant were co-owners of suit properties, that defendant had 1/2 share therein and that the other 1/2 share belonged to plaintiffs jointly. One Govindsingh was the original owner of the suit properties. He died leaving behind him surviving two sons Chhatrasingh and Amarsingh; the latter is defendant. Chhatrasingh died leaving behind him three sous, Hathubha, Dalpatsingh and Ganpatsingh; the latter two are plaintiffs Nos. 5 and 6. Plaintiffs Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 ar...
Jethabhi Nanjibhai Vs. Bipinchandra Parshotam and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-02-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Guj183; (1967)8GLR640
ORDER1. This is an application under section 561-A of the application contains a prayer that the charge framed under against the applicant should be quashed. The charge was framed under section 406 of the India Penal Code. Even on the basis of the complaint, the applicant is the managing partner of the firm of the firm. The allegation in the complaint is in respect of a sum of Rs. 10,000/- which was realised during the business, of the firm. A charge of misappropriation cannot lie in respect of one firm of money received by a managing partner of partnership business, as what amount is due to various persons and what is due from them can be settled by taking accounts are taken, there cannot be a criminal complaint of misappropriation of a sum admittedly received during the partnership unless there is evidence to show that the amount of Rs. 10,000/- was specially entrusted to the applicant. There is no such allegation in the complaint that the sum of Rs. 10,000/- was specially entrusted....
Govind Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-02-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Guj288; 1967CriLJ1633a
(1) The Medical officer did not describe the twenty four injuries, which he deposed, he found on the person of the deceased, but he merely stated that he had stated the description of the injuries in the post mortem report. The post mortem report is not evidence, even if it be used to corroborate the evidence of the medical officer. Before it can be used to corroborate, there must be evidence in the evidence of a witness, which can be corroborated. In all such cases, it is necessary for the doctor to describe all the injuries in his evidence. The conviction and sentence are, therefore, set aside and the matter is ordered to be re-tried.(2) Appeal allowed....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›