Gujarat Court January 1967 Judgments
Gamansinghji Vs. N.V. Vaniker and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Guj242; (1968)0GLR486
Bhagwati, J.(1) The short but interesting question of law which arises in this petition is whether the Collector is entitled to make an award under Section 13 and 14 of the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) without the previous approval of the State Government. The determination of the question depends upon the whether the proviso to Section 11, sub-section (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, applies to the making of an award under Sections 13 and 14. The question is rather an important one and was ably debated before us by the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the parties. In order to appreciate the arguments which have been advanced before us, it is necessary to set out briefly the facts giving rise to the petition. The petitioners are the former Jagirdars of Virampur Jagir which was situate in Palanpur Taluka of Banaskantha District. The Jagir was admittedly a proprietary Jagir and it was so held by an or...
Tag this Judgment!Thakordas Sugnamal and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Guj47; 1969CriLJ199; (1969)GLR355
N.G. Shelat, J.1. Armed with a general order in writing issued by late Mr. Niranjan Das, Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad, under section 6(1) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') Mr. Dharia, the P. S. I. Ahmedabad City, accompanied by the police officers and the panchas raided the house bearing No. 2375/B/3 Kalupur -- I at about 8-30 p. m. on 28th December 1964 in pursuance of some information received by him that it was used as a gaming house and that the accused and other persons were gaming or present for the purpose of gaming. Finding them gaming with cards and money, he made a panchnama in respect of all that was found there. He also searched those persons who were found gaming in cards and money. The complaint was then lodged against accused No. 1 for offences under sections 4 and 5 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, and under section 5 of the said Act against the remaining accused Nos. 2 to 9. The accused pleaded not guilty to ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Batukbhai Hargovind Vora and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Guj66; 1969CriLJ406; (1968)GLR309
N.G. Shelat, J. * * * * *7. The material point, however, to be considered is as to whether the carryingof any such lighted torches would come within the meaning and ambit of the words 'corrosive substance or of explosives' used in Section 37(1)(b) of the Act Be it said here, that this Act is in English. The notification produced at Ex. 4 was undisputedly issued in Gujarati -- it being the local language of the State. Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 37 of the Act referred to in the Gujarati notification as already set out hehereabove viz. 'Bali nakhe teva agar salagi uthe teva padartho laene nikalavani' can well be normally understood in English as meaning 'carrying inflammatory or combustible substance'. The notification has been issued in exercise of the powers under Section 37(1)(b) of the Act by the District Magistrate of Bhavnagar and the question then is as to whether his power or authority to prohibit 'carrying of inflammable or combustible substances' would be within th...
Tag this Judgment!Surendrasinhaji Jorawarasinhji Jhala Vs. U.M. Bhatta and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-23-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Guj292
Bhagwati, J.1. Yesterday, on the conclusion of the arguments, we passed an order allowing the petition and making the rule absolute by issuing a writ of certiorari quashing and setting aside the order of the first respondent dated 12th January 1967. We now proceed to state our reasons for making the order.2. The Petitioner is the erstwhile Ruler of the quondam State of Wadhwan. Though according to the petitioner, he was ordinarily resident in Wadhwan, his name did not appear in the electoral roll for the Wadhwan Assembly Constituency and he, therefore, made an application to the Electoral Registration Officer for inclusion of his name in the electoral roll of the Wadhwan Assembly Constituency under Section 23 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The application was on a printed form which was supplied by the Electoral Registration Officer on a request being made in that behalf, and it was supported by one Trambaklal Mohanlal Dave, who was an elector on the electoral roll of t...
Tag this Judgment!Ramalal Tribhovandas Thakkar Vs. Shantaben and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-20-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Guj171; 1968CriLJ1073; (1967)8GLR658
ORDER1. x x x x x(9) What was urged by Mr. Thakkar in this respect was that any amount by way of medical charges at the rate of Rs. 15/- per month to her in addition to maintenance amount of Rs. 60/- cannot be awarded to her for the reason that the words 'allowance for the maintenance of his wife' in Section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code would not ordinarily include any such charges. It was also argued that no medical practitioner has been examined to show that she was suffering from tuberculosis and that she has been and would be keeping such bad health for practically all time to come. Now the words ' allowance for the maintenance' used in Section 488 of the Code cannot necessarily be taken to mean only the amount that would be required to spend on food etc. It is a very wide term in the sense that it would include all the necessities of a person when she is required to live separate from her husband. The amount to be paid to her may vary having regard to the means that her husb...
Tag this Judgment!Hati Devdan Sarman Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-17-1967
Reported in: (1967)0GLR494; (1968)IILLJ638Guj
Divan, J. 1. In special case No. 2 of 1965, in the Court of the learned Special Judge. Junagadh, the accused, who is appellant before us, was charged under S. 161, Indian Penal Code, and S. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act.) At the end of the trial, the learned trial Judge found the accused guilty of the offences punishable under S. 161, Indian penal Code, and S. 5(2) of the Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 200, in default further rigorous imprisonment for four months. It is against this judgment and order of the learned trial Judge that the present appeal has been filed. 2. The prosecution case is that the accused was the sarpanch of the village panchayat of Kalej village in Junagadh district at the relevant time. The complainant, Hamir Lala, who was at the relevant time residing at Kalej, was carrying on business of selling 'pan-bidis' and for this purpose he used to si...
Tag this Judgment!Manka Hari Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Guj88; (1967)8GLR588
1. The appellant has been convicted on 5-10-1966 by the City Magistrate, 8th Court, Ahmedabad, for an offence under section 16(1)(a)(1) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. (Hereinafter referred to as the Act) for selling adulterated milk. He has been for selling adulterated milk. He has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 1000 in default of payment of which to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months.(2) The prosecution case is set out in the deposition of the food inspector Shri P. S. Sharma (Exh. 2). He states that on 17-1-1966 at about 6-15 A.M. when he was near the Asarwa Government quarters with his peon Pawar he saw the appellant passing with a can containing milk and stopped him. The appellant had milk and measures with him He called one Babulal Mohanlal and then asked the appellant about the quality and rate of the milk. The appellant told him that it was cow's milk and the rate was 6 P. Per 100 ...
Tag this Judgment!Ambalal Sarupchand Maniar and anr. Vs. Manibhai Tulsibhai Patel and an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-1967
Reported in: (1968)9GLR672
N.G. Shelat, J.1. The facts giving rise to this application are that opponent No. 1 has been serving as a Sanitary Inspector in the Municipality of Mehsana. He filed a complaint against the two applicants in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Mehsana in respect of their having committed an offence for putting up some construction without obtaining the permission of the Municipality punishable under Section 155(7) of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963. The complaint did not bear any Courtfee stamp. That led the applicants-accused in the case to present an application Ex. 5 inter alia alleging that the complainant is not a municipal officer and as such not a public servant who is exempted from affixing any Court-fee stamp on the complaint filed by him, and since the complaint bears no Court-fee stamp as required by law, it is liable to be dismissed. After hearing the other side, the learned Magistrate passed an order wherein he observed that under Section 73 of the Gu...
Tag this Judgment!Sevantilal S. Shah Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Guj14; 1969CriLJ63; (1968)GLR925
ORDERN.G. Shelat, J.1. This application in revision arises out of an order passed on August 3, 1965 by Mr. D. C. Mehta, Chief City Magistrate, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Case No. 649 of 1965, whereby the complaint came to be dismissed under Section 203 of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The Gujarat Industries Private Ltd. Bombay having its registered office at Bombay-4, of which the complainant Mr. Sevantilal Shah happens to be the Secretary, has been manufacturing fountain pens and its components of different varieties such as 'Ashok', 'Service', 'Champion' etc, and of those, the most popular fountain pens in demand, are 'Champion' and 'Ashok'. The annual sale of the fountain pens extends over rupees thirty lakhs and out of the same, the sale of 'Champion-555' fountain pens covers a sum of rupees six lakhs or so. The prices of 'Champion' and 'Ashok' fountain pens are about Rs. 18/- and Rs. 7-50 to Rs. 9/- per dozen respectively. The complainant has then alleged that the trade mark on the f...
Tag this Judgment!Jilubha Fatehsinh Parmar Vs. A.J. Thakar and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-1967
Reported in: (1967)8GLR705
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This petition raises interesting questions of law relating to the construction of certain provisions of the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act, 1951 and the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. The petitioner was a Bhayat under the former State of Muli in Saurashtra and as such Bhayat, he was the owner of several lands which included Survey No. 365 situate in village Kukada. The rights of the petitioner's ancestors to the mines and minerals in the Bhayati lands were recognised and declared by the former Rajasthanik Court by a Hak Patrak dated 16th August, 1880 and the petitioner was therefore the owner of the mines and minerals in S. No. 365 at the date of coming into force of the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act, 1951. Survey No. 365 comprised 16 Acres and 11 gunthas of land and out of that, there were admittedly sand-stone deposits in an area of 7 Acres and 4 Gunthas. Now, according to the petitioner, mining operations in this area for the purpose of win...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »